[Xastir] Sample settings for USRadar.geo ?

Gerry Creager gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Thu Mar 4 13:12:22 EST 2004


Is your change to the 2nd tiepoint based on empirical evidence?  I'd 
done the original calculations, and checked on my system, based on the 
known created extents of the image from Gempak...

And, I'm running 24 bit X.  Thus, I need the whole 3 bytes of 
transparent color, as you suggested.

gerry

Curt, WE7U wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote:
> 
> 
>>Here's the contents of the .geo file that work for me:
>>
>>#US Composite Radar image (Unidata/LDM/Gempak) n5jxs 2003 08 25
>>URL     http://mesonet.tamu.edu/gemdata/images/radar/01_USrad.png
>>#                       X               Y               Long Lat^M
>>TIEPOINT                200             200             -123.00000 48.00000
>>TIEPOINT                5300            2000            -67.00000 27.00000
>>IMAGESIZE 5500 2200
>>REFRESH 720
>>TRANSPARENT 0xffffff
>>
>>
>>Note that, if you're bandwidth-deficient, you can change the update from
>>every 6 minutes, which is how often I generate a new mosaic, to some
>>other, longer increment.
> 
> 
> I've been thinking about doing that on mine.  Reasoning is not
> bandwidth, but how hard my computer works every six minutes after it
> has the image and is trying to display it.  I don't like the
> computer to bog down every six minutes, and that is a large image.
> 
> This is the one that is in the sources now and works for me:
> 
> #
> # $Id: USRadar.geo,v 1.1 2004/02/11 18:24:51 we7u Exp $
> #
> #US Composite Radar image (Unidata/LDM/Gempak) n5jxs 2003 08 25
> URL     http://page4.tamu.edu/images/01_USrad.png
> #           X       Y       Long        Lat
> TIEPOINT    200     200     -123.00000  48.00000
> TIEPOINT    5800    2300    -67.00000   27.00000
> IMAGESIZE   6000    2500
> REFRESH     720
> TRANSPARENT 0x0ffff
> 
> You'll notice that the 2nd tiepoint is different, the imagesize is
> different, and the transparent value is different.  That last may be
> working for me because I run a 16-bit display.  Is the 0xffffff
> necessary because you're running 24-bit?
> 
> The extra '0' I have after the 0x is a don't care.  It just makes it
> more readable.  It's a 16-bit value I have there.
> 
> --
> Curt, WE7U			    archer at eskimo dot com
> Arlington, WA, USA		http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
> "Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
> "Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
> "The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"




More information about the Xastir mailing list