Hi again,
I am using [1] as rules for r.reclass to shift a map's value range of
-100..100 to 0..200. After reclassification, r.info shows the result as
quoted in [2]. I am missing the line saying that -100 has been reclassified
to 0.
Why is this line missing?
Wondering, Hermann
[1]
-100 = 0
-99 = 1
...
99 = 199
100 = 200
[2]
Range of data: min = 0 max = 200
...
Category Original categories
1 -99
2 -98
3 -97
...
--
View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/r-info-output-after-r-reclass-tp5158003.html
Sent from the Grass - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hermann wrote:
I am using [1] as rules for r.reclass to shift a map's value range of
-100..100 to 0..200.
fyi, see also r.recode, r.rescale, and r.mapcalc.
After reclassification, r.info shows the result
as quoted in [2]. I am missing the line saying that -100 has been
reclassified to 0.
Why is this line missing?
I don't know, you might look into the $MAPSET/cellhd/mapname file and
look for clues.
It may be a hold-over from before GRASS 5, when '0' was treated as NULL.
the important thing is that 'r.info -r' and r.univar show the correct
values.
Hamish
On 2014-08-24 5:44, Hamish wrote:
Hermann wrote:
I am using [1] as rules for r.reclass to shift a map's value range of
-100..100 to 0..200.
fyi, see also r.recode, r.rescale, and r.mapcalc.
I am aware. I don't want to create new map with 200 000 x 200 000 px (all of Europe in 20m resolution). I just want to quickly reclassify before exporting into GeoTIFF with type=Byte.
After reclassification, r.info shows the result
as quoted in [2]. I am missing the line saying that -100 has been
reclassified to 0.
Why is this line missing?
I don't know, you might look into the $MAPSET/cellhd/mapname file and
look for clues.
It may be a hold-over from before GRASS 5, when '0' was treated as NULL.
the important thing is that 'r.info -r' and r.univar show the correct
values.
Thanks for the hints. Is there any intention to get rid of the left-overs from GRASS 5, perhaps in GRASS 8 ?
Hermann