New Format Mr. Sid

where they can be inserted into an older LADY

Inserting things into older ladies hardly seems like a suitable subject for this forum.

Like

Oh God, Jim... LOL ??ÿ

Whoops that should have been LDD file. Microsoft at it again.

Mr. Sid has a new format??ÿ Guess they aren't using those around here.?ÿ It has been a while since I have seen a sid.?ÿ

Where can one download this file to try it out??ÿ Lizardtech makes side, right??ÿ Do they have a converter??ÿ [REDACTED] works with just about everything.

It's the State of Montana GIS site. They put up the newer aerial photos, but they're in a newer format and my older programs don't recognize the format. Even lizardtech's Geoviewer 2.1 can't use them. The newer lizardtech's program does read them, but I can't get it to export them to a geotiff.

[REDACTED] is a little pricey for occasional use.

Here is a link to LizardTech. They are the creators of the MrSID compression technology.

They offer a free viewer that may export to different formats like TIFF.

https://www.lizardtech.com/geoviewer-pro/system-requirements

?ÿ

Carlson has a new SID conversion routine in Carlson 2018. Worked like a champ. Another work around Computer updates solved.

I couldnt get it to work. It just kept hanging up my computer. I also couldn't figure out how to have it make a tiff file. It read the photo fine, but I couldn't get anything to work past that.

Thats what we do is use Lizardtech Geoviewer to bring in Sid files and then convert them to .tiff files.

The nice thing is it holds the state plane coordinates and they drop right into LDD where they belong with our GPS points.

Whats works for us is bringing in a SID or multiples, and then just exporting the area we need - no edges then

When we export them we choose Format = Geotiff , Resolution = Full REsolution and we tag the "Write World File" also.

Works like a charm - this is version 5.50.3396 of Geoviewer

?ÿ

Guess I was just impatient. It's a relatively slow operation, but it's processing the file now.

Not picking, but if you're running this on your XP machine you're likely closer to the minimum hardware requirements than the recommended requirements.?ÿ Actually XP isn't even listed in their list of supported OS's.

• 2.5 GHz quad core processor
• 4 GB RAM
• 200 MB of disk space for installation and additional space for images
• SATA drive or better

However, it is still possible to run GeoViewer on systems with the following minimum hardware requirements:

• 1.5 GHz processor
• 1 GB RAM
• 200 MB of disk space for installation and additional space for image

It's a brand new Dell with Windows 10, 500 G hard drive, i7 CPU, 16GB RAM, 64 bit. It took it nearly 2 hours to process a 150,291KB SID file into a 107063 KB Tiff file.?ÿ

Resulting Tiff quality was equal to the SID photo.

Are you experiencing that amount of processing time?

I may have to raise hell with Dell.

Send me a link to the photo you were processing and I'll run it through mine and see how long it takes.

?ÿ

I just grabbed photo 5825 (150,361 KB) and converted it to a full resolution GeoTiff (7,178,326 KB) in about 5 minutes.?ÿ Maybe there was an issue with the particular map you were working on.

My system is about 3-4 years old with an i7-2600 CPU @3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, 64-bit Win-10, with a Nvida GeForce GTRX 1060 6GB video card (not sure that makes a difference).

I was also streaming music on YouTube and had AutoCAD 2017 and three browser windows open while processing the image.?ÿ ??ÿ ??ÿ

It's been over fifteen years, but the old 1M doqq weren't that hard to move around in arcview (reprojecting was another ball of wax).

The woldfile was hackable and the coordinates related to the center of the top left pixel, followed by a value for each pixel size. It was a workable option.

It was the first file I ran through so maybe there was some system setup functions going on. I did it on the map option.

?ÿ

I've since ran a view option and it ran right through. The coordinate system was different however. There was a shift from where the 2011 version plotted out, however. There was also a very slight rotation difference also.

It's geoinfo.msl.mt.gov.com frame 0815

?ÿ