I think something is wrong in you vrt file. The number of pixels seems
extremely high 2147483647 x 2147483647. This would result in a huge
geotiff ~ 4611686014132420609 bytes. A regular geotiff is limited to 4 GB
in size. This can be increased with Big Tiff support.
On 1 April 2014 03:31, wr
Selon "Newcomb, Doug" :
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Even Rouault
> wrote:
>
> > Moses,
> >
> > Hum, your VRT is 2147483647 x 2147483647 large, which is the largest
> > possible
> > raster that GDAL can handle in theory ! Something must have gone seriously
> > wrong
> >
> > That would be more
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Even Rouault
wrote:
> Moses,
>
> Hum, your VRT is 2147483647 x 2147483647 large, which is the largest
> possible
> raster that GDAL can handle in theory ! Something must have gone seriously
> wrong
>
> That would be more than enough pixel range to cover the earth wi
Moses,
Hum, your VRT is 2147483647 x 2147483647 large, which is the largest possible
raster that GDAL can handle in theory ! Something must have gone seriously wrong
when building it. I suspect that some input files have weird or inconsistant
georeferencing causing the extent to go to those crazy
t-systems.com> writes:
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
> I am getting this weird error when I try to convert a vrt to a tif.
>
> Some context: We are tiling a set of tifs(in a list file). First we
generate a vrt from the list. Then we assign a projection on the generated
vrt using gdaltranslate. We t
Hi everyone,
I am getting this weird error when I try to convert a vrt to a tif.
Some context: We are tiling a set of tifs(in a list file). First we generate a
vrt from the list. Then we assign a projection on the generated vrt using
gdaltranslate. We then clip the output using gdalwarp applying
