[Proj] WGS84 to Sphere Inconsistency Between Proj Versions

Mon Aug 25 16:05:37 EDT 2008

There is no such thing as a spherical datum.  Not since the late 1600s, anyway.  Before then ... beats me.  For the past 300 years or so, there has been no such thing as a spherical datum.  Period.  There were these two little French "expeditions" - one to Lapland & one to Peru that proved Newton's theory that the earth is best approximated by an oblate ellipsoid of revolution and not by the French theory of a prolate ellipsoid of revolution - Published in 1716.

I publish monthly in Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing.  Each month my column on the Grids and Datums of the world cover a different country's geodetic history, it's coordinate systems that comprise its datums and grid systems, etc.  The American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing has been publishing my columns at their website (for free downloads) in pdf files since 1997.  Right now, I'm more than halfway through the world.  This month is on Saudi Arabia, next month is on Sakhalin Island, Russia.

I post messages, comments, opinions, advice, jokes, and occasional insults (to liberals) on the POB forum frequently. (Current messages are 3,400+.)

Check out the website at the bottom of my signature block.

Clifford J. Mugnier, C.P., C.M.S.
Past National Director (2006-2008),
Photogrammetric Applications Division
American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 
and 
Chief of Geodesy,
CENTER FOR GEOINFORMATICS 
Department of Civil Engineering 
Patrick F. Taylor Hall 3223A
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY 
Baton Rouge, LA  70803
Voice and Facsimile:  (225) 578-8536 [Academic] 
Voice and Facsimile:  (225) 578-4474 [Research] 
Honorary Life Member of the 
Louisiana Society of Professional Surveyors 
Member Emeritus of the ASPRS 
Member of the Americas Petroleum Survey Group
======================================================
http://www.asprs.org/resources/GRIDS/
======================================================

________________________________

From: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org on behalf of Landon Blake
Sent: Mon 25-Aug-08 11:27
To: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions
Subject: RE: [Proj] WGS84 to Sphere Inconsistency Between Proj Versions

Clifford wrote: "Absolute spatial positions between disparate datums are lost when using datum-specific coordinates in a single spherical projection."

Are you talking about moving a position between two spherical datums, or any transformation which involves a spherical datum?"

Clifford wrote: "I suggest you read some of my past columns, in particular "The Basics of Datums.""

Where could we find these columns?

Do you also post messages on the POB forum occasionally?

Thanks,

The Sunburned Surveyor

________________________________

From: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org [mailto:proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org] On Behalf Of Clifford J Mugnier
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:03 AM
To: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions
Subject: RE: [Proj] WGS84 to Sphere Inconsistency Between Proj Versions

Absolute spatial positions between disparate datums are lost when using datum-specific coordinates in a single spherical projection.  I suggest you read some of my past columns, in particular "The Basics of Datums."  This is not an appropriate venue to get into a detailed tutorial on geometric geodesy and it's historical foundations.

In regards to your logic, I'll leave the rationalizations to you.  What I said stands as is.

C. Mugnier

________________________________

From: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org on behalf of Mikael Rittri
Sent: Mon 25-Aug-08 10:26
To: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions
Subject: RE: [Proj] WGS84 to Sphere Inconsistency Between Proj Versions

Dear Mr. Mugnier, 

you wrote 

>When diddling with spherical projections, the concept of "DATUM" is entirely inappropriate. 

which made me quite confused, because

1) I think what you wrote is absurd, and 

2) I know well that you are an expert in geodesy.  

But Hillel said, "the shamefast is not apt to learn", so let me go on.  

I suppose you require more properties of a geodetic datum than I care about.  

For me, a geodetic datum is essentially a way to georeference a map (or at least 

to georeference the graticule on the map.)  Surely you are not saying that if a map 

uses a spherical projection, then its graticule cannot be georeferenced.  

I have also been wondering why the EPSG people, when describing the web Mercator, 

are careful to say that the geodetic datum is not WGS84 but something spherical 

that is not a true datum.  

As I see it, the projection machinery has to treat the earth as a sphere, while the 

datum shift machinery has to treat it as an ellipsoid.  And why not?  In Carmenta Engine,

the Mercator class has a switch that lets you choose between ellipsoidal and spherical 

formulas.  So the projection can ignore the flattening of the ellipsoid, but the datum shift 

machinery will not.  

Are you (and EPSG) reasoning like this: 

      (1.) all projections must be implemented by ellipsoidal formulas, so 

      (2.) the only way to emulate spherical formulas is to supply an earth 

             model that is a sphere from the beginning; and no proper datum 

             can be spherical.  

?  

If so, then I agree that (2) follows from (1), and I agree that proper datums should 

not be spherical.  But I do not agree that (1) is true. 

Best regards,

--
Mikael Rittri
Carmenta AB
Box 11354
SE-404 28 Göteborg
Visitors: Sankt Eriksgatan 5
SWEDEN
Tel: +46-31-775 57 37
Mob: +46-703-60 34 07
mikael.rittri at carmenta.com
www.carmenta.com 

________________________________

From: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org [mailto:proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org] On Behalf Of Clifford J Mugnier
Sent: den 22 augusti 2008 05:45
To: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions; PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions
Subject: RE: [Proj] WGS84 to Sphere Inconsistency Between Proj Versions

When didling with spherical projections, the concept of "DATUM" is entirely inappropriate.

Cliff Mugnier

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY

________________________________

From: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org on behalf of Frank Warmerdam
Sent: Thu 21-Aug-08 22:38
To: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions
Subject: Re: [Proj] WGS84 to Sphere Inconsistency Between Proj Versions

Faron Anslow wrote:
> I just ran this:
>
> cs2cs +proj=latlong +datum=WGS84 +to +proj=lcc +lat_1=50 +lat_2=50
> +lat_0=50 +lon_0=-107 +a=6371200.0000000000 +es=0.0 +f=0.0
> +towgs84=0,0,0 -r
>
> on:
> 70.933 -8.667
>
> and got:
> 2873633.37    4593659.18 -12148.43
>
> which is my original matlab answer and that from the old proj4.4.  Now,
> the question is if forcing the datum shift with +towgs=0,0,0  is
> appropriate? Doesn't +towgs48 conflict with/override the spherical
> projection definition?

Faron,

I can't imagine any situation other than an effort to match old answers
where it makes sense to apply a plain lat/long on a sphere to lat/long on an
ellipsoid conversion the way this is doing.

If you want the lat/long values computed from the lcc projection based on
a sphere to treated as WGS84, then use +nadgrids=@null (or in 4.6.0 just
omit a datum specifier for the lcc projection).  This is *likely* want
you want.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
Proj at lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.maptools.org/pipermail/proj/attachments/20080825/1cdfd6a5/attachment-0001.html