Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-02-03 Thread Michael Bedward
> 2009/1/13 Martin Desruisseaux wrote: > >> Yes we can add the operation in an unsupported module. Just for information, >> if >> the operators are pure JAI, the following project may be worth a look. I >> have no >> idea how good it is and if it still active however: >> >>https://jai-operato

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-12 Thread Michael Bedward
2009/1/13 Martin Desruisseaux wrote: > Yes we can add the operation in an unsupported module. Just for information, > if > the operators are pure JAI, the following project may be worth a look. I have > no > idea how good it is and if it still active however: > >https://jai-operators.dev.jav

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-12 Thread Martin Desruisseaux
Michael Bedward a écrit : > Would it be possible / useful to add new operators to a new or > existing unsupported module ? I need to do more such work for my > project anyway, and if I could add them to the geotools unsupported > modules it would be very helpful for me to get feedback on the > ope

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-11 Thread Michael Bedward
Hello Martin, > This is a nice example, but I wonder: using a mask in this case means applying > the contraints in a "all or nothing" fashion. This is quite convenient for > exploratory work. But as the model become more elaborate, I would intuitively > (I > may be totally wrong - I work more with

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-10 Thread Martin Desruisseaux
Hello Mickael Michael Bedward a écrit : > Then there is another project where I am working on simulations of > animal populations where the summed value of habitat resources > available to an animal is constrained by the presence of other animal > territories. This is a nice example, but I wonder

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-10 Thread Michael Bedward
2009/1/10 Martin Desruisseaux : > > The inconvenient of the default implementation of the Convolve operator is > that > if we use a kernel of said 4x4 and if there is only 1 NaN value among the 16 > pixels under that kernel, then we get NaN. So we can loose a lot of area that > way. We could creat

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-09 Thread Martin Desruisseaux
Michael Bedward a écrit : > Would the MaskedConvolve operator be a useful addition to the > gt-coverage module ? It could for images backed by integer values. For floating point values, I tend to favor a different approach but I don't know if it is applicable in your case. In my case, image backe

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-08 Thread Michael Bedward
2009/1/7 Martin Desruisseaux wrote: > However the above involves a lot of images (up 6) because of intermediate > steps. > Maybe this is not an issue. But if it is, you could also create your own JAI > operations doing all this work in one step. It also give you more control on > what is computed

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-06 Thread Michael Bedward
Hi Martin, Many thanks for your answer - I was actually hoping that you would respond ! I haven't studied ROI use in any detail yet, but at first glance it doesn't seem to be as integrated into JAI operations as I thought it would be. But I'll look into it more. I think I'll try your suggestion

Re: [Geotools-gt2-users] masking a grid coverage

2009-01-06 Thread Martin Desruisseaux
Hello Michael ROI is one aspect of JAI that I lack experience in. The approach that I'm writting below may be less efficient than ROI. I posting it just in case, but it may be worth to explore more on the ROI side. A possible approach may be to binarize the mask in order to create a new image con