I'm looking for a way to batch process a gazillion .rw5 files into Star*net. Running Windows 10. Does anyone know of a good, simple, easy to use macro utility that will take all the .rw5's in a folder, run the utility and output identically named .dat files?
Have you tried using a simple DOS batch file? It'd be easy enough to try it. The key would be whether or not the converter will run from the command line with an input parameter. (I assume you've checked to see if the converter has batch capability built-in.)
Yes, I have used StarCarlson
It works about 99% of the time. It struggles in certain situations, mainly because it seems that Carlson has some minor inconsistencies in the .rw5 format, depending on SurvCE version. They blame StarNet (of course), and basically ask why you dont just use their software.
Resections is the biggest hangup, and if you have those, check the rod and instrument heights, and you will have to edit the .rw5 files to make it work. If you import the RTK information, there are some edits needed as well, I believe.
Field procedures matter. If you shot something, then overwrote that shot with another, they are both in the raw data, and both will show up with the same point number in the .dat file. There are some other housekeeping items, like making sure the same point numbers are not used unless it is the same point, then if it is the same point, make sure the same point numbers are being used (or use the .alias command).
When running a traverse, we store the point as the same point number, no matter how many times we traverse through it, simply writing it as raw data only into SurvCE. You can also use a command in the point description that will be recognized by StarNet and changes the point number assigned.
Conclusion: It is not perfect, but I use it all the time, and it is a very useful tool. It is worth the money.
dmyhill, post: 386969, member: 1137 wrote: Yes, I have used StarCarlson
It works about 99% of the time. It struggles in certain situations, mainly because it seems that Carlson has some minor inconsistencies in the .rw5 format, depending on SurvCE version. They blame StarNet (of course), and basically ask why you dont just use their software.
Resections is the biggest hangup, and if you have those, check the rod and instrument heights, and you will have to edit the .rw5 files to make it work. If you import the RTK information, there are some edits needed as well, I believe.
Field procedures matter. If you shot something, then overwrote that shot with another, they are both in the raw data, and both will show up with the same point number in the .dat file. There are some other housekeeping items, like making sure the same point numbers are not used unless it is the same point, then if it is the same point, make sure the same point numbers are being used (or use the .alias command).
When running a traverse, we store the point as the same point number, no matter how many times we traverse through it, simply writing it as raw data only into SurvCE. You can also use a command in the point description that will be recognized by StarNet and changes the point number assigned.
Conclusion: It is not perfect, but I use it all the time, and it is a very useful tool. It is worth the money.
Thanks for those observations. I always bring everything in as "raw data", because I'm doing multiple shots on the same points (endlessly). And I've gotten pretty good at editing them too, given the numbers of blunders I've created (calling out back sights as the wrong point number, no distance to the backsights, numbering new points the same as previously used points etc.
As for batch processing, I'm running a vm and DOS is probably not even an option. The program is written in Windows, so I'd prefer to find something that just takes the files one at a time, runs the program, saves the file and moves on to the next.
rfc, post: 386973, member: 8882 wrote:
As for batch processing, I'm running a vm and DOS is probably not even an option. The program is written in Windows, so I'd prefer to find something that just takes the files one at a time, runs the program, saves the file and moves on to the next.
My version of StarCarlson does not appear to have the ability to do batch processing. It is one file at a time as far as I can tell.
As a last resort, there are quite a few Windows scripting applications that will probably allow a batch approach to work. The question is whether or not coding the script is going to take more time than just processing the files individually.
Jim Frame, post: 387021, member: 10 wrote: As a last resort, there are quite a few Windows scripting applications that will probably allow a batch approach to work. The question is whether or not coding the script is going to take more time than just processing the files individually.
Correct, Sir. I tried one, and the problem is that you need to find each file in a directory then allow the converter to choose an identically named file (with the .dat extension) and save it. i think I'm stuck.
