comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » MIN_CURVE_SURF vs. TRI_SURF

Home » Public Forums » archive » MIN_CURVE_SURF vs. TRI_SURF - Problem

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

MIN_CURVE_SURF vs. TRI_SURF - Problem [message #15035]

Mon, 19 April 1999 00:00

<asowter
Messages: 5
Registered: March 1999

Junior Member

Another cry for help! I'm a regular user of IDL and am using it to process
RS data.

I have some large regular arrays that have holes in and have tried to
interpolate across them but I get either bad results or the process is too
slow! TRI_SURF is fastest but gives horrible striping effects with large
variations across larger holes - this is also the case for TRIGRID. The
best by far is MIN_CURVE_SURF (KRIG2D is really slow) but this tends to slow
down my program to the extent that it takes 3x longer to complete than with
TRI_SURF or TRI_GRID!!!

The call I'm using is:

result=min_curve_surf(z,x,y,gs=[1,1],bounds=[0,0,xdim0,ydim0 ])

Z, X and Y contain the value and ordinates of the good (regularly spaced)
pixels within the BOUNDS box.

Any suggestions/alternatives would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance

Andy

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

MIN_CURVE_SURF vs. TRI_SURF - Problem

By: <asowter on Mon, 19 April 1999 00:00

Previous Topic:	How to check if a file is indeed a NetCDF file?
Next Topic:	framegrabber

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 13:53:01 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.36157 seconds