Gregor Mosheh wrote:
Hi, all. We're seeing some distortion in an image, a loss of viewing
quality, and am hoping that y'all can provide some insight into what may
be the issue.
Here are the URLs:
http://dev.geowake.com/chart.test/index.php
http://ms2.geowake.com/
Yes, it's Google Maps, but bear with me. :)
The "dev" one is using a PNG sliced for use in Google Maps.
The "ms2" one is Mapserver WMS, using the same PNG but with a worldfile
and without slicing since the idea here is to use WMS and save a lot of
work as well as being vendor-neutral.
Gregor,
Thanks for the direct pngs.
I know it is was really obvious to you, but there wasn't enough of the
maps paged in before I started zooming for me to even realize there was
a subregion that was different.
You'll see that the "dev" one has a much "smoother" look to it. If you
zoom in three notches, you can read the map's title clearly. The
Mapserver WMS version, the text is very obviously blocky even if you
zoom in 4 notches. As you keep zooming in, the quality difference
becomes more obvious as you can read the PNG's smaller text but not the
WMS's.
So, what to do? I have tried and eliminated several possibilities, and
am stumped.
- Source image quality; the PNGs on both sides are visually identical in
an image viewer. I have tried the source image in TIFF and PNG with
various options.
- Bad world file; the spatial extent matches that of the other map, and
I've checked the math repeatedly and found it A-OK
- Image format options; I have tried every image format supported, and
the image always comes out looking the same, so it's not interlacing
gone wrong, nor lossy JPEG compression, etc. The outputformat block is
set to generate PNG-24 RGBA, and I have verified by downloading from the
WMS that it is doing so.
Possibilities I've not yet exhausted:
- Resampling; using PROCESSING "RESAMPLE=AVERAGE" improved the image
quality but only very slightly.
- Reprojection; the images are in WGS84 (EPSG 4326) and I know that
Google uses their weird Mercator (54004). I added 54004 to our EPSG
file, and have tried various approaches such as reprojecting the image
to 54004 ahead of time, and using 54004's numbers in a worldfile so
there'd be no reprojection at all, but the effect is always the same.
I guess I don't get the process that the nice image is going through.
Are you having to pre-reproject it to Mercator before slicing it
up for the exact Google maps zoom levels? Or do you just provide
it in 4326 and google maps takes care of reprojecting it?
Are the source PNGs paletted or RGB 24bit? Paletted images won't
respond well to alternative resampling algorithms. I'm guessing
that the nice images are effectively bilinearly interpolated in
RGB space though I'm not clear on where that is happening.
Selecting PROCESSING "RESAMPLE=BILINEAR" and giving it 24bit RGB
input files should give something fairly similar I'd think.
One problem is that Mapserver actually leaves it to GDAL to do much
of the downsampling in highly decimated situations. So it is also
important to build overview levels in some appropriate fashion.
Likely you will need to do this with -r average for gdaladdo.
It *might* be possible to fool with the OVERSAMPLE_RATIO processing
option in your map to give a better bilinear resampling without
having to pre-build overviews. This might also improve the appearance
of average resampling. Something like:
PROCESSING "OVERSAMPLE_RATIO=16"
But basically, resampling fine text like this (or delicate linework)
from a raster source is just a crappy situation to be in. Even the
good results are pretty crappy in my opinion.
Good luck,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
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 | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
_______________________________________________
mapserver-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
