Next Article in Journal
A Study on a Matching Algorithm for Urban Underground Pipelines
Next Article in Special Issue
pyjeo: A Python Package for the Analysis of Geospatial Data
Previous Article in Journal
Education and Training in Applied Remote Sensing in Africa: The ARCSSTE-E Experience
Previous Article in Special Issue
Recommendation of Heterogeneous Cultural Heritage Objects for the Promotion of Tourism
Open AccessArticle

Comparison of FOSS4G Supported Equal-Area Projections Using Discrete Distortion Indicatrices

ISRIC—World Soil Information, Droevendaalsesteeg 3, Building 101, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2019, 8(8), 351; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8080351
Received: 30 April 2019 / Revised: 30 July 2019 / Accepted: 7 August 2019 / Published: 9 August 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Open Science in the Geospatial Domain)
This study compares the performance of five popular equal-area projections supported by Free and Open Source Software for Geo-spatial (FOSS4G)—Sinusoidal, Mollweide, Hammer, Eckert IV and Homolosine. A set of 21,872 discrete distortion vindicatrices were positioned on the ellipsoid surface, centred on the cells of a Snyder icosahedral equal-area grid. These indicatrices were projected on the plane and the resulting angular and distance distortions computed, all using FOSS4G. The Homolosine is the only projection that manages to minimise angular and distance distortions simultaneously. It yields the lowest distortions among this set of projections and clearly outclasses when only land masses are considered. These results also indicate the Sinusoidal and Hammer projections to be largely outdated, imposing too large distortions to be useful. In contrast, the Mollweide and Eckert IV projections present trade-offs between visual expression and accuracy that are worth considering. However, for the purposes of storing and analysing big spatial data with FOSS4G the superior performance of the Homolosine projection makes its choice difficult to avoid. View Full-Text
Keywords: FOSS4G; equal-area projection; Homolosine; EckertIV; Mollweide; Hammer; Sinusoidal; Discrete Global Grid FOSS4G; equal-area projection; Homolosine; EckertIV; Mollweide; Hammer; Sinusoidal; Discrete Global Grid
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Moreira de Sousa, L.; Poggio, L.; Kempen, B. Comparison of FOSS4G Supported Equal-Area Projections Using Discrete Distortion Indicatrices. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2019, 8, 351. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8080351

AMA Style

Moreira de Sousa L, Poggio L, Kempen B. Comparison of FOSS4G Supported Equal-Area Projections Using Discrete Distortion Indicatrices. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2019; 8(8):351. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8080351

Chicago/Turabian Style

Moreira de Sousa, Luís; Poggio, Laura; Kempen, Bas. 2019. "Comparison of FOSS4G Supported Equal-Area Projections Using Discrete Distortion Indicatrices" ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 8, no. 8: 351. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8080351

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop