I've also been toying with the compression settings lately and thought
I would mention my experience. I'm not sure if this is known behavior,
but when subsequently using the compressed rasters with 'gdaldem' I
got some strange results when the raster was greater than 4GB (i.e.
BIGTIFF). The resulti
, Sep 25, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Kyle Shannon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kyle Shannon wrote:
>> Stephen,
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Stephen Roecker
>> wrote:
>>> Out of curiousity the other day I compared the results of gdalwarp (-r
>&g
Out of curiousity the other day I compared the results of gdalwarp (-r
average) against the raster R package aggregate(fun=mean) function
for aggregating a raster to a coarser resolution. I was suprized how
different the results of gdalwarp were from raster. When zooming in
and manually averaging
