Many thanks! This seems to be exactly what I was looking for!
Definitely, the otb doc needs major improving. This is what is stated
regarding these arguments:
"Sub-Sampling Rate X: Generates a result at a coarser resolution with
a given sub-sampling
rate along X"

which is just a side effect, the main definition should be that the
metric window is displaced at that rate.
(If it were just a matter of a coarser result the process would not be
so much faster).
Nevertheless, I'd appreciate confirmation that this is really what
happens. I feel uneasy conjecturing...

Agus


On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Carlos Hernando
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I think that if you uses the subsampling option you can perform consecutive
> registrations of increasing accuracy with a smaller metric windows. in this
> way, you can maybe obtain similar results reducing the time.
>
>
> Best regards
> Carlos
>
> El miércoles, 26 de noviembre de 2014 17:44:04 UTC+1, alobo escribió:
>>
>> After having used otbcli_FineRegistration quite a lot,
>> I have come to the conclusion that the Metric window defined by Metric
>> Radius X and
>> Metric Radius Y must be quite large, otherwise the calculated offset
>> values are prone
>> to be too local (it is easy to find sporious high correlations at
>> positions that are not geometrically correct if the window is over a
>> homogeneous area) and unrealistically variable.
>>
>> The problem is that the program is very slow for large Metric windows.
>> Neverthless, there is no reason why the metric window should be
>> positioned at every pixel.
>> FineRegistration could have "jumpX", jumpY" arguments so that the
>> metric is calculated
>> every jumpX and jumpY pixels, which would speed up computation a lot.
>> For example
>>
>> -erx 5 -ery 5 -mrx 121 -mry 121 -jumpx 31 -jumpy 31
>> would be enough
>> The final
>> X and Y offset "images" would then be just interpolated. It is more
>> important a large mrx and mry
>> than having the values calculated at every pixel.
>>
>> This should not be hard to implement for someone knowing well the
>> code. I would be willing to intensively test the new implementation.
>>
>> Agus
>
> --
> --
> Check the OTB FAQ at
> http://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/FAQ.html
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "otb-users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/otb-users?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "otb-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
-- 
Check the OTB FAQ at
http://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/FAQ.html

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "otb-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/otb-users?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"otb-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to