It's June - Better LOLA? |
It's June - Better LOLA? |
Nov 26 2010, 06:58 PM
Post
#46
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 26-January 10 From: Reading, UK Member No.: 5192 |
Thanks for the replies.
I think I'll have a go at writing some code to process the rdrs. I have the code to do the gridding and bad data removal from the work I did with the MOLA data. |
|
|
Nov 26 2010, 07:06 PM
Post
#47
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 30-July 09 Member No.: 4887 |
How are you guys processing the RDRs? I have found RDR2TAB and RDR2XYZ but they are for MAC only, has anyone found a win32 version? I have the fortran source code but no compiler. Thanks for any help. Sorry, I do not know of a win32 version. I wrote my own FORTRAN RDR reader based on the description of the RDR file. Erwan M. described to me a lot of conversions needed to create a DEM. I skip those because I need to use the raw data points for my work. Also, I found I needed to examine segments carefully with a viewer to make sure no erroneous data points were included (they are not flagged yet, perhaps in future versions). Anyone heard when the WAC LRO stereo DEM is going to be published? |
|
|
Nov 26 2010, 07:18 PM
Post
#48
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 3431 Joined: 11-August 04 From: USA Member No.: 98 |
I think I'll have a go at writing some code to process the rdrs. I have the code to do the gridding and bad data removal from the work I did with the MOLA data. Interesting. I've done the work and gotten results but haven't had time to release anything yet. At the moment I exclude bad LOLA data on a file-by-file basis. Fortunately they have cleaned up a lot of the data, just not quite all of it. |
|
|
Nov 26 2010, 08:02 PM
Post
#49
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 890 Joined: 18-November 08 Member No.: 4489 |
it should build in MinGW on windows but you would need to spend a week or two setting up MinGW ( unless you have done that a lot -- then a day or two )
However i have not done this for the rdr FORTRAN files , so it is a guess . MinGW runs much faster than CygWin |
|
|
Nov 28 2010, 01:29 AM
Post
#50
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 26-January 10 From: Reading, UK Member No.: 5192 |
I briefly tried MinGW but I was getting lots of compiler errors so I gave up. I have now written some c code to process the rdrs and it looks like its working ok. Now I just need to download all the rdrs which looks like its going to take a very long time.
|
|
|
Nov 28 2010, 04:05 AM
Post
#51
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 890 Joined: 18-November 08 Member No.: 4489 |
those errors are from mingw needing to be configured BY HAND for EVERY AND ALL text based files
that is why a new person to mingw will take 1 two 2 weeks to find all of the hard coded " c:\PROG~\????" hard links in it every one needs to be reset to c:\Gnuwin32\Minjgw the gnuwin32 project for some very odd and bad reason lies windows install everything to c\Program Files\ Program name with ALL the spaces --- not good then the paths c\GnuWin32\MinGW and c:\GnuWin32\Msys need to be added to the Microsoft system path and Msys needs to be set up a bunch of work |
|
|
Nov 28 2010, 02:55 PM
Post
#52
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 3431 Joined: 11-August 04 From: USA Member No.: 98 |
|
|
|
Nov 28 2010, 07:45 PM
Post
#53
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 26-January 10 From: Reading, UK Member No.: 5192 |
|
|
|
Nov 28 2010, 08:37 PM
Post
#54
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 890 Joined: 18-November 08 Member No.: 4489 |
seeing as the labels are the ones being updated
http://imbrium.mit.edu/DATA/LOLA_RDR/LRO_NO_10/ *.DAT Aug 17 *.LBL Nov 5 and the LBL's are 5.8 K each very small to update |
|
|
Nov 28 2010, 08:41 PM
Post
#55
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 3431 Joined: 11-August 04 From: USA Member No.: 98 |
seeing as the labels are the ones being updated Not correct - in the past most of the data has been updated, extensively. Whether all the data will be updated in the next round, well - for the sake of our poor Internet connections it might be nice if it weren't, but it might also be good if it was. So far it's been improving over time. |
|
|
Dec 31 2010, 10:50 AM
Post
#56
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 27-February 10 From: Italy Member No.: 5235 |
I think to have found an error on LDEM 256 download from imbrium.mit.edu
In the LBL file, MAP_RESOLUTION and MAP_SCALE are reversed, I Have checked on pds-geosciences Wrong MAP_RESOLUTION = 118.451 <m/pix> MAP_SCALE = 256 <pix/degree> Correct MAP_RESOLUTION = 256 <pix/degree> MAP_SCALE = 118.451 <m/pix> Someone can correct it? |
|
|
Jan 2 2011, 07:57 AM
Post
#57
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10227 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
In the old days this was straightforward. Resolution was always given as so many meters (or kilometers, or your unit of choice) per pixel (or line pair... OK, maybe it wasn't so straightforward)... anyway, resolution = m/pixel or some equivalent. And map scale was given as 1:500,000, or 1:1 million, or "1 cm represents 10 km" or words to that effect.
Digital maps messed this up a bit because a digital file could be printed at any physical size. So the idea developed that digital map scales should be defined as the number of pixels across a standard distance unit - pixels per degree of latitude for instance. These things are not really universal and strictly speaking they are ambiguous, but that is common usage. So I have to say, actually, there is no mistake. Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Jan 2 2011, 02:18 PM
Post
#58
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 27-February 10 From: Italy Member No.: 5235 |
Thanks for the answer Phil, but it is strange, because now I can't found the wrong file. Now all the LBL file have MAP_RESOLUTION with <pix/deg>.
I have an old file (PRODUCT_CREATION_TIME = 2010-09-15T00:00:00) with MAP_RESOLUTION in m/pix and MAP_SCALE in pix/degree, the file name is LDEM_256_0_180_0N_90N.LBL. Perhaps is changed from September Ciao VB |
|
|
Jan 2 2011, 02:26 PM
Post
#59
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 890 Joined: 18-November 08 Member No.: 4489 |
QUOTE Perhaps is changed from September the date for the 256 dem is Nov 30 and for the 256 LBL is Dec 2 the labels were updated |
|
|
Jan 22 2011, 12:32 AM
Post
#60
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 3431 Joined: 11-August 04 From: USA Member No.: 98 |
Here's a little something to show how good the LOLA data is getting. This is a map generated from the LOLA data only, as if the moon were a uniformly-colored surface, with each point illuminated from a 45 degree angle to the
LOLA_diagnostic_illumination_whole_11K.jpg (11520x5760 pixel JPG image; 27MB) Edit: and if you really want the full-size version, it's here: 23040x11520 pixel JPG image; 71MB |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th September 2024 - 03:44 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |