Timeline for How to determine projection parameters when customizing a projection
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:33 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://gis.stackexchange.com/ with https://gis.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Sep 3, 2012 at 14:37 | comment | added | whuber | Thanks for the explanation of your use of a convex hull. In fact, my experience has been that many spatial analyses eventually extend somewhat beyond the original borders of the study area (if only to help avoid edge effects in statistical analyses), so I find usually it's a good idea to define the region of interest as a buffer around the original study area. | |
| Sep 3, 2012 at 5:50 | vote | accept | fbiles | ||
| Sep 3, 2012 at 5:18 | comment | added | fbiles | Definition of region of interest – That is a good suggestion, using “exactly the region of interest.” It does turn the project area from looking like a coffin to looking like a lobster…which is nice. I used the convex hull because the entire western half of the project area is an archipelago. I wanted to be sure the project boundary captured all the outlying small islands and water area in between. | |
| Sep 3, 2012 at 5:17 | comment | added | fbiles | Thank you. Have found v. little practical details of how to choose the “projection center” (graphical center? spherical center? does it have to be exactly at the center? how to determine the implications of where it is placed?) and how to choose the centerline azimuth (what would be a workflow in ArcMap to correctly determine the azimuth? how to evaluate the distortion associated with the placement? are there strict rules to follow for these decisions? how do other people do this?). I think you answered my question with “this is frequently done by trial and error ..." | |
| Aug 24, 2012 at 14:48 | history | answered | whuber | CC BY-SA 3.0 |