Peter Willis wrote:
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
There isn't anything magical about 256.
256 or better raster scales sure are pretty though.... :)
Seriously though, the raster data is floating point log data
with relatively random spatial distribution. Short of making
two images, one log float and one anti-log float, it would be
nice to be able to scale on the fly without duplicating the
original data.
Duplication of rasters is O.K. if you have one or two, but
once you near the 30k-40k files mark the disk space becomes
a tad expensive.
Would it be out of line to suggest some scaling functions
like the generic math functions:
log
log10
sin
...
Peter,
I understand your point, but I remain somewhat hesitant to build it
a lot more complexity into the floating point handling for display.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
_______________________________________________
mapserver-users mailing list
mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
