Re: [gdal-dev] Question on 0th IFD offset when producing a JPEG-Compressed GeoTIFF (GDAL 1.11 vs 2.x)

2016-12-16 Thread Daniele Romagnoli
Hi Even, thanks for the feedback! Since I'm here, I'm bothering you again with another question. I have regenerated that GeoTIFF using GDAL 2.1.2. Right now there isn't a useless IFD at the beginning anymore, due to the improvement you was talking about. While still checking the data bytes (with

Re: [gdal-dev] Question on 0th IFD offset when producing a JPEG-Compressed GeoTIFF (GDAL 1.11 vs 2.x)

2016-12-16 Thread Daniele Romagnoli
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Even Rouault wrote: > > > > Wondering if when generating overviews we still have a problem similar to > > > the one you have fixed in 2.0 or some data-updating issue. > > > > > > These are my hypothesis on what is going on. > > > A

Re: [gdal-dev] Question on 0th IFD offset when producing a JPEG-Compressed GeoTIFF (GDAL 1.11 vs 2.x)

2016-12-16 Thread Even Rouault
> Right, > Indeed, before sending my previous email I have also tried with: > *gdaladdo -r average --config COMPRESS_OVERVIEW DEFLATE --config > PHOTOMETRIC_OVERVIEW RGB* > to understand if it was related to JPEG only but, even with these options, > the output overviews were jpeg compressed (I

Re: [gdal-dev] Question on 0th IFD offset when producing a JPEG-Compressed GeoTIFF (GDAL 1.11 vs 2.x)

2016-12-16 Thread Daniele Romagnoli
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Even Rouault wrote: > > > > Right, > > > Indeed, before sending my previous email I have also tried with: > > > *gdaladdo -r average --config COMPRESS_OVERVIEW DEFLATE --config > > > PHOTOMETRIC_OVERVIEW RGB* > > > to understand if it

Re: [gdal-dev] Question on 0th IFD offset when producing a JPEG-Compressed GeoTIFF (GDAL 1.11 vs 2.x)

2016-12-16 Thread Even Rouault
> Wondering if when generating overviews we still have a problem similar to > the one you have fixed in 2.0 or some data-updating issue. > > These are my hypothesis on what is going on. > A simple translate with no overviews makes the file ending at 0x7555 with > offset of next IFD saying 0x.

[gdal-dev] DWG_driver in compiled version available?

2016-12-16 Thread lucvanlinden
Hi Is this https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/DWG_driver work also available in a (windows) compiled version of GDAL/OGR? tx Luc -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/DWG-driver-in-compiled-version-available-tp5300170.html Sent from the GDAL - Dev mailing list

[gdal-dev] Fwd: [Projects] Budgeting project event support for 2017

2016-12-16 Thread Even Rouault
Hi, below an invitation from the OSGeo board for projects to mention their budget needs for 2017. We could potentially ask for funds to cover, at least partially, expenses of people who attend code sprints (not completely sure if funds can be allocated for that), like the Daytona code

Re: [gdal-dev] WMTS - Need TileLevel option Servers responding with bad capabilities

2016-12-16 Thread esacree
Even, I tried the daily build from 9-Dec-2016. The new ZoomLevel parameter is there and the value is extracted. Unfortunately, GDAL is still using the maximum tile level from the capabilities document. USGS hasn't responded to my request to fix their capabilities documents. ESRI's world time

Re: [gdal-dev] WMTS - Need TileLevel option Servers responding with bad capabilities

2016-12-16 Thread Even Rouault
On vendredi 16 décembre 2016 13:14:37 CET esacree wrote: > Even, > > I tried the daily build from 9-Dec-2016. The new ZoomLevel parameter is > there and the value is extracted. Unfortunately, GDAL is still using the > maximum tile level from the capabilities document. That works fine for me.

Re: [gdal-dev] DWG_driver in compiled version available?

2016-12-16 Thread Even Rouault
On vendredi 16 décembre 2016 08:52:19 CET you wrote: > Hi > > Is this https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/DWG_driver > work also available in a (windows) compiled version of GDAL/OGR? It is available in the MSVC 2013 builds (requires a C++11 compiler) at: http://gisinternals.com/development.php >