Sure, sorry about that.
I am analyzing various methods of calculation of surface roughness. So
I will have several maps, produced with different methods, at
different scales and with different datasets.
All maps are calculated with moving-window procedures. I'll have maps
calculated with neighborhoods of 3,5,7,9,11,.. pixels, over DEMs with
5,10,25,50,90 meters resolution, using probably three different
methods.
So I'll end up with tens of maps! I was wondering what would be a good
approach to compare them. I was thinking to rescale all maps to a
common range (say, 0-255) first, and then compare.
I guess it makes sense to compare like this:
DEM_10m - Window_Size_3x3 - method A/B/C
DEM_10m - Window_Size_5x5 - method A/B/C
and so on for each dem resolution and window size.
carlos
On 8/7/07, Jarek Jasiewicz <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> Carlos "Guâno" Grohmann wrote:
> > What do you guys think is a good approach to compare several raster
> > maps at the same time? correlation matrix? some graphical output?
> > density plots?
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > carlos
> >
> >
> well, give us more detail what do you need
>
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Carlos Henrique Grohmann - Guano
Visiting Researcher at Kingston University London - UK
Geologist M.Sc - Doctorate Student at IGc-USP - Brazil
Linux User #89721 - carlos dot grohmann at gmail dot com
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
_________________
"Good morning, doctors. I have taken the liberty of removing Windows
95 from my hard drive."
--The winning entry in a "What were HAL's first words" contest judged
by 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY creator Arthur C. Clarke
Can't stop the signal.
_______________________________________________
statsgrass mailing list
[hidden email]
http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/statsgrass
