On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 18:26:09 -0500, "Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Megginson writes: > > > > Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > > > > ..has anyone played with the lower detail 30 arcsec SRTM Terrain > > > data, _and_ the new higher detail 3 arcsec data, _mixing_ the > > > data, to try produce even higher detail than the 3 arcsec data? > > > I mean, both data sets_are_ correct. > > > > I'm not sure how you'd end up with higher-level detail. For every > > 100 points in the 3 arcsec DEM, there will be one point in the 30 > > arcsec DEM, presumably equal to the highest of the 100 points (but > > I'm not sure -- Norm can probably fill us in). ..picture the land as a giant tent, with tent poles for every data point. Adding more data points, adds more tent poles. Remove any data, remove those tent poles. > the 30 sec SRTM is much better then the previous gtopo30 product which > it replaces. However where available the 3 arc second product is > better yet except for the occasional hole. ..and it may well be that the data mix job is too expensive in data points gained over simply tossing out the old data. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
