Nikos wrote: > ... I realised that I don't really have the "correct" metadata file for > the scene I was given. The "meta" file available at Glovis is not really > the complete set of meta-information (is my guess -- missing > "sat_zenith=" value for example).
fwiw with Landsat-7 downloads from GloVis I get files like L7*_MTL.txt which works with the i.landsat.toar metfile= option, it includes SUN_ELEVATION and SUN_AZIMUTH but nothing obvious about zenith that I can see. looking in the source code, landsat_met.c (which parses the metadata file) isn't looking for satellite zenith- it only comes from the command line, and in landsat.c it seems that only the DOS2b, DOS3, and DOS4 correction methods actually use it. So for uncorrected method (which I guess is the appropriate one if the task is cloud detection??) that variable doesn't matter. > the output values (even if the sat_zenith value I used is > non-sense) seem to be as expected for radiance/reflectance values good. > (e.g. band 1, > min=-0.00308741863579021, max=0.39202091888652) . I think this already got answered a couple of days ago, but is the reflectance on a scale from 0.0-1.0 (0-100%)? and what are the W/m^2-like units for radiance used for the output maps? > Is the following the problem (you expect-ed)? I see strange > characters, e.g.: > > ------------------- > BAND 1 (code 1) > calibrated digital number (DN): 1.0 to 255.0 > calibration constants (L): -1.520 to 193.000 > at-sensor radiance = 0.76583 � DN + -2.28583 > mean solar exoatmospheric irradiance (ESUN): 1983.000 > at-sensor reflectance = radiance / 492.32067 > ------------------- > BAND 2 (code 2) > calibrated digital number (DN): 1.0 to 255.0 > calibration constants (L): -2.840 to 365.000 > at-sensor radiance = 1.44819 � DN + -4.28819 > mean solar exoatmospheric irradiance (ESUN): 1796.000 > at-sensor reflectance = radiance / 445.89406 no, that is something else, it's a non-ASCII char in the fprintf() string. Maybe it will show up in the email: it's the dot multiplier "·". for me in "less main.c" it shows up as <B7>, in nedit and vi I see the dot. I guess that should be %c + the code for it, or just "*" ? .. displaying it will be terminal and locale dependent .. > In my last test(s) no segfault occured... good > with or without "-v" !?? both should work. > Even though "nice words" are inexpensive, I don't think enough people really appreciate that cost/benefit .. > I still think they are important (when they are honest). From my side, > I just need some timing to contribute back - > all seems to go wrong currently :-p best of luck & enjoy your time, Hamish _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
