Folks, As I often seem to do, I exactly stated my point. I meant write:
"On the other hand, I am *not* denying the possibility that the RPC DEM interpolation is always off by half a pixel in all cases." Sorry for that. On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Ivan Lucena <ivan.luc...@princeton-ma.us> wrote: > Hi Frank, > >> On the other hand, I am denying the possibility that the RPC DEM >> interpolation is always off by half a pixel. I haven't actually >> looked closely at that code lately and the RPC code is not so very well >> tested and validated. > > That is exactly what I understood from Yehiyam on his first message. We all > believe that GDAL transformation knows the input dataset pixel reference; and > knows the GCPs pixel reference. What we are not sure, is if it is doing the > right thing when reading from the auxiliary DEM dataset in terms of pixel > reference. > > Regards, > > Ivan -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
