Hi, On Thursday 19 June 2008 12:06:03 Nikos Alexandris wrote: > On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 13:10 -0700, Dylan Beaudette wrote: > > r.resamp.stats (>=GRASS 6.3) > What about cubic upscaling and then back to your original resolution?
I would say that r.resamp.stats is a better way. What you are trying to do is to degrade the resolution of your initial data, and you're trying to come up with a value that is representative of the distribution of higher resolution pixels. If you are using discrete data (land use classes or somesuch), then the mode is possibly useful. For continuous fields, depending on the distribution, you might want to use some other metric. Your method just takes one value and assigns it to the lower resolution data, without any regard to its significance. Jose _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
