You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have a local directory with GeoTIFF files with different shapes. I've explored the coerce_shape parameter to define manually a certain shape. I'm wondered if there's a workaround to coerce all images according to the largest shape in the directory instead of defining it manually. The following lines show how I define the catalog:
Thanks @martindurant for pointing the possible future routes. Both are valid for me.
When you say a new catalog able to instrospect a set of data, do you have any specific example?
It would be great to implement a lazy operation to retrieve image size e.g. PIL's Image.open (see here). However, I am not sure how effective this operation might result for a catalog with million of images.
When you say a new catalog able to instrospect a set of data
Not really, this would be a new model. Catalogues have access to their child data sources of course, but it is not the normal pattern to try to access their internal metadata. As you say, this might be expensive. There are, however, lazy catalogues, where entries (the objects that make sources) are only created on request.
I have a local directory with GeoTIFF files with different shapes. I've explored the
coerce_shape
parameter to define manually a certain shape. I'm wondered if there's a workaround to coerce all images according to the largest shape in the directory instead of defining it manually. The following lines show how I define the catalog:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: