comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: UTM Map Projection Produces Incorrect Results
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: UTM Map Projection Produces Incorrect Results [message #78171 is a reply to message #78170] Mon, 31 October 2011 10:02 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
MarioIncandenza is currently offline  MarioIncandenza
Messages: 231
Registered: February 2005
Senior Member
David,

I am still confused. The first line of code in your article uses a
keyword to MAP_PROJ_INIT, "ELLIPSOID='wgs84'", which I can find
nowhere in the documentation of MAP_PROJ_INIT. I see a DATUM keyword
(that doesn't solve the problem described-- map parameters are still
spherical when I specify DATUM=8). Was this ELLIPSOID keyword
introduced in a recent version?

Anyway, perusing the group archive, I see that Andrew Cool in 2004
said "I suspect that there is an inherent problem in IDL's mapping
routines in the way they handle Transverse Mercator and rotation."

Might be worth updating this page with new information:
http://www.idlcoyote.com/map_tips/utm_to_ll.html

proj.4 is nice any everything, but one of the strongest points
remaining in IDL's favor is that it does not use external libraries
and thus does not have dependency troubles that plague other
solutions. In the short-term, they should just fix the bug-- I
seriously doubt that there was ever a version of the GCTP software
that couldn't handle UTM.

--Edward H.
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Another "How to efficiently do this in IDL" question
Next Topic: IDLDE linux cannot create workspace

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 17:24:21 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00432 seconds