Jump to content

 
Photo

I have an interesting question

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1
Robert2009

Robert2009

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Cruces, NM
  • United States

I have 5 different layers that I need to perform them and not sure which method is best to use. I need to do some analysis work using Geology, Vegeation, Elevation, slope and Aspect.

Should I perform them all into raster ? or should I perform them in vector ?

Our soil scientist would like them to do pre-mapping predict by using the soil line of a specific area.

The reason I am asking is because when I do convert the Elevation to vector i does not work in ArcGIS because
of the 2 GB limit shapefile, so that is why I am not sure if this is the right method.

I'd like to hear from GIS Expertise on this who can give me some suggest ?

Thanks,
Robert

#2
François Goulet

François Goulet

    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mille-Isles, Qc
  • Interests:Cartography, History, Graphic Design and almost everything else...
  • Canada

The reason I am asking is because when I do convert the Elevation to vector i does not work in ArcGIS because
of the 2 GB limit shapefile, so that is why I am not sure if this is the right method.


If you're only stopped by file size, you could place you vector in a file geodatabase.

You can store up to 1TB of data per table and as many table as you want by file geodatabase.

But after that, querying all your layers altogether (or do an intersect, union, ...) to analyse them could be very long too... For that kind of analysis, I prefer raster...

#3
Robert2009

Robert2009

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Cruces, NM
  • United States

The reason I am asking is because when I do convert the Elevation to vector i does not work in ArcGIS because
of the 2 GB limit shapefile, so that is why I am not sure if this is the right method.


If you're only stopped by file size, you could place you vector in a file geodatabase.

You can store up to 1TB of data per table and as many table as you want by file geodatabase.

But after that, querying all your layers altogether (or do an intersect, union, ...) to analyse them could be very long too... For that kind of analysis, I prefer raster...


Thanks François ! I was thinking of that as in Raster too....

Robert

#4
P Riggs

P Riggs

    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Collins, Colorado
  • Interests:Playing music; studying French language, culture, and history; listening to old time radio; learning and playing accordion; hiking, though I don't get to do much now with having young children, will change in the future; fly-fishing, same as hiking; reading
  • United States

I would go with raster.

I've never seen an analysis using aspect and slope done in anything BUT raster. But that may be just a legacy thing from old ArcInfo/Grid days.

You would be losing elevation information by converting elevation to contours. Did you convert elevation to a TIN? Even so, last time I looked ArcGIS converted TINs to rasters for most analyses anyway. Maybe this has changed?
Philip Riggs
Decorative-Maps.com

#5
BioGeoMan

BioGeoMan

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 188 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Albuquerque, NM
  • United States

It seems that the data layers you intend to use are inherently raster. Depending upon the type of analysis you are engaging in, both data types have advantages...but in this case, without knowing specifics, it seems that raster is the way to go. Converting the elevation, aspect, and slope data into vector could pose potential problems and use up valuable time.

Hope my vote counts!

M.

Michael Scisco

BioGeoCreations
Albuquerque, NM

505-603-3636
biogeocreations.com


#6
Robert2009

Robert2009

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Cruces, NM
  • United States

It seems that the data layers you intend to use are inherently raster. Depending upon the type of analysis you are engaging in, both data types have advantages...but in this case, without knowing specifics, it seems that raster is the way to go. Converting the elevation, aspect, and slope data into vector could pose potential problems and use up valuable time.

Hope my vote counts!

M.



Yes, Looks like I will be doing that way , since convert them to vector takes a lot of time if they are big enough. I believe you can do that in a smaller area. Maybe nowdays the computers aren't big enough to be able to do that but in the future I hope they will be much faster and powerful than today.

Cheers from Las Cruces

Robert




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

-->