Is projecting to NH state plane and option? Along the lines of using
something more localized.
Mark
On May 14, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Kurt Springs <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks Rich and Dylan
I downloaded the pdf of document #1395. At the moment I am leaning
toward Lambert Conic Conformal (1SP) since it seems to use Lat/Long
of Natural Origin, in case I need to use a GPS. If I am reading you
right Latitude and longitude don't even come into the equation,
just the projection.
I've been looking at the website http://www.dmap.co.uk/
utmworld.htm. I was mistaken it was 18 and 19T that NH falls in.
However, it appears to be just the western most sliver. However, if
I don't have to figure out the conversion, so much the better.
Kurt
On May 14, 2010, at 12:00 PM, [email protected]
wrote:
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 08:10:20 -0700
From: Dylan Beaudette <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [GRASS-user] Latitude/Longitude vs UTM
To: Rich Shepard <[email protected]>
Cc: GRASS user list <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Rich Shepard <[email protected]
> wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Kurt Springs wrote:
This was interesting in that it told me that r.topidx could not
be run
with latitude and longitude and I had to convert to UTM. I was
wondering
if this is the answer to the problem and I just had to convert to
UTM.
Kurt,
Lat/Long represents geographic coordinates, not a projection of
location
on a mathematial model of the earth. UTM is the Universal Transverse
Mercador projection that we see on most printed (or computer
displayed) maps
of the earth. There is documentation within the GRASS Web site
that provides
a good explanation of the differences. GRASS modules work on
geographic
projections, not just coordinates.
There is a USGS technical report from the mid-1980s that's the
standard on
projections. While it is becoming more rare to locatate, see if
you can find
a copy.
I think that Rich is referring to this USGS document, #1395
http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/pp/pp1395
Definitely worth the price if you want to become an expert in map
projections.
One other question. New Hampshire appears to fall within two UTM
zones
(19T and 20T) Is there a way for a maps set to contain two UTM
zones?
Yes. Don't use UTM. In this case use a regional projection that suits
your needs:
1) navigation --> use a conformal projection
2) area statistics --> use an equal-area projection
... etc ...
Variations on the Albers or Lambert (conformal) conic projections
work
quite well for large regions that are wider than tall, but for such
as
small state should be just fine. We use an Albers equal-area
projection to house soil survey data for the lower 48 states.
Interesting. NH is a tall, narrow state so one would assume it
would be
within a single zone. Regardless, yes there is a way to reproject
locations
in one zone on the other, but it's non trivial and I've not done it.
I wouldn't recommend it. The desirable properties of the UTM system
(i.e. the fairly good compromise between distortion, preservation of
angles, and preservation of area) only occur within a zone's
boundaries. The farther you move from the central meridian of the UTM
zone, the more distortion you will encounter-- therefore 'projecting'
UTM z10 data into UTM z11 is technically possible, but not a great
idea.
Oregon is primarily in Zone 10, but the eastern edge (I don't
recall the
distance within the state) is in Zone 11. The available DEM and
hydrologic
data were reprojected from 11 to 10 by the supplying agency.
Hmm...
Dylan
Rich
_______________________________________________
grass-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
_______________________________________________
grass-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
_______________________________________________
grass-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
