Opened 13 years ago
Closed 6 years ago
#4246 closed enhancement (fixed)
gdal_retile.py with overlapping tiles
Reported by: | jgrn307 | Owned by: | warmerdam |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | default | Version: | unspecified |
Severity: | major | Keywords: | overlapping tiles |
Cc: | christian.mueller@… |
Description
It would be really helpful if the script included the ability to add an overlap between adjacent tiles. The tile settings would be the same, but the overlap parameter would pull a "border" around each tile which overlaps with the tile next to it. The reason I'm asking is we are going to be performing neighborhood functions on post-tiled data (e.g. a 3x3 smooth) but the edges of the tiles would not function correctly, which would result in inter-tile seamlines after we stitch the tiles back together.
Change History (7)
comment:1 by , 13 years ago
Cc: | added |
---|
comment:2 by , 9 years ago
comment:3 by , 9 years ago
I'm not sure I agree that it is that special a use case. Any local window analysis would need this capability if the tiles were, for instance, sent to different workers on a cluster for processing. I'd request it be kept open in the hopes someone will add this capability down the line. It doesn't seem like it would be too hard to code up (is there some flavor of a "crop" occurring within the code?) It would just need to add a fixed margin to each tile's crop.
comment:4 by , 9 years ago
Priority: | high → normal |
---|
All those tickets have more than one year and nobody has acted on it, so the priority is not so high
follow-up: 6 comment:5 by , 7 years ago
Hello, has anybody worked on this at all? I can see that the gdal_retile.py
docs now mention -overlap val_in_pixel
(GDAL >= 2.2), but I can see this implemented anywhere in the source.
comment:6 by , 7 years ago
Replying to nicolasw:
Hello, has anybody worked on this at all? I can see that the
gdal_retile.py
docs now mention-overlap val_in_pixel
(GDAL >= 2.2), but I can see this implemented anywhere in the source.
Replying to myself: found it in rev 35009
comment:7 by , 6 years ago
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
I understand the need in your use case but it does also feel like a rather special use case.
I keep the ticket open but I think it would not be violent to close it as wontfix either.