Andrew Brooks wrote:
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:21:22 +0100, Even Rouault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
my guess is that your merged1.tif TIFF has areas which are not initialized
(black/transparent areas). gdal_merge.py probably doesn't write any data in
them, thus leading to missing blocks in the file.
Thanks for the reply, that certainly seems to be the explanation. It does
raise further questions though.
1. Should the gdal utilities' output be consistent with each other?
Andrew,
I don't see this as an inconsistency.
2. Should the default output format be the most compatible?
Yes, within reason it likely ought to be.
3. Should there be an option to turn on/off the writing of sparse files?
Yes, likely. In fact it wouldn't so much be an option to turn sparse writing
on/off as it would be an option to push out zeroed blocks for all missing
blocks when a file is closed.
Feel free to file a ticket on this, and I'll try to fix it fairly soon. The
default should presumably be to produce maximally compatible files even though
I wish the rest of the world would support sparse files in a sensible way.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
