Le jeudi 15 août 2013 20:04:51, Ivan Lucena a écrit : > Hi Even, > > I double checked and I noticed that this is not true: > > > The RAT is transferred to the geotiff file in both instances. > > I pass -a_nodata and got no RAT as you can see on the > following log. > > Without -a_nodata the file gtiff_i8u_c_i.tif.aux.xml is create with the > full RAT.
Yes, that's exactly what I said in my previous email. > > But for output HFA that is still true. I can pass > -a_nodata or not and the RAT is always copied to the output. > > Try that: > > $ gdal_translate -of hfa i8u_c_i.img hfa_i8u_c_i.img -a_nodata 0 > $ gdal_translate -of hfa i8u_c_i.img hfa_i8u_c_i.img > > Is that the same that you are getting over there? Well, this is different. The HFA driver is a bit particular in its behaviour and reports a RAT when there's a color table (in fact a color table is a particular type of RAT). So technically the RAT of the source IMG is not transferred into the target IMG in the -a_nodata 0 case, but the color table is. -- Geospatial professional services http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
