-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Decide and Implement new Centerline Strategy #382
Comments
A few ideas... Assuming that what is breaking our centerline method right now is the number of vertices and using Theisen polygons, I'm wondering if we try something staying in Raster first. Feel free to shoot this down... what if:
Or... |
@lauren-herbine and @shelbysawyer feel free to make suggestions if you have them. Otherwise mentioning you for FYI |
Just found this old post from Duncan, that is quite helpful for our CL strategy discussions: Riverscapes/ConfinementTool#39 |
@philipbaileynar can you ask @KellyMWhitehead to try the Euclidian Distance thing and see where that gets us? I believe that because step 1 will be to produce a binary raster that is outside all valley bottoms, it should overcome some of the lateral partitioning of valley bottoms that are getting split apart in bigger valley bottoms when they should be lumped together. |
Someone should experiment with Euclidean distance by hand before we write any code. Could even be model builder. |
This is now complete with 0.7 onwards. |
In #381 we tried to bring back centerlines, but with decisions to leave rasterized edges, we have way more vertices and this was blowing up the centerline tool. Six steps forward one step back ;). @philipbaileynar, @KellyMWhitehead and @joewheaton need a new strategy.
Once we have it, let's spell it out up here by editing this post. I will put my thoughts below.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: