2010/2/9 Frank Warmerdam <[email protected]>: > Jorge Arévalo wrote: >> >> Mmm... But I suppose this is in case of rasters with pixel type = >> Byte. In that cases, should I always follow this scheme? pArray for >> first band, pArray + 1 for second band, and so on (interlaced)? I >> mean, why don't pArray for first band, pArray + raster_width for >> second band...(non interlaced)? >> >> Anyway, I'm working in a "WKT Raster format to GDAL format" parser. I >> get all the bands in different arrays: void * pBandData, for example. >> And the pixel type of these bands can be Byte, Int16, Float32, etc. >> So, I don't have one array for all the raster data, I have a different >> one per band. >> >> In such situation, has sense this scheme? >> >> DATAPOINTER = pBandData >> PIXELOFFSET = (GDALDataTypeSize(raster_pixel_size) / 8) (this is, 1 = >> pixel size byte, 2 = pixel size int16, 4 = pixel size int32, etc) >> LINEOFFSET = PIXELOFFSET * raster_width_in_px > > Jorge, > > Yes, this is correct, but you can just omit the PIXELOFFSET and > LINEOFFSET values in this situation since this is the default > configuration. You only need to specify them if you are doing > something complicated, like interleaving. > Ok. So, interleaving is not the default behaviour when creating a raster from scratch, from mem.
Many thanks! Best regards, Jorge > Best regards, > -- > ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- > I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, > [email protected] > light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam > and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent > > _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
