Take the 2-minute tour ×
Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for cartographers, geographers and GIS professionals. It's 100% free, no registration required.

My system: Linux Ubuntu 10.04 server (100gb: 4gb RAM: 32bit) /tomcat6/geoserver/geowebcache/FWTools

My Objective: Create Aerial Photo coverage in ETRS89 N32

My Data: 1300 3 band Orthophotos in Tif Formal with a resolution of 12,5m @ 75MB

Question: How should I do this and at the same time save space on the server?

I am thinking of reducing 3 bands to 1 , reduce resolution by half then image-mosaic in geoserver and serve with geowebcache.

Has anyone every done this? I would be pleased to hear from anyone who has done this successfully.

yours,

Rob

share|improve this question
    
It might be best to ask your questions here and then post the link to the GeoServer list instead of just asking the same thing in two places. –  iant Jan 31 '12 at 9:04
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

No matter which way you slice it, you'll need a load of disk space to store those images. I wouldn't recommend using an index colour format because it'll look pretty darn awful.

The resolution is really dependent on what your clients will be doing with the imagery, and whether they'll be happy losing features smaller than 25m.

A way to reduce the size of the imagery is to use compression, either lossy (OK, technically 3-to-1 band conversion is lossy, but that's unacceptable lossyness, IMO) or lossless. Looking at the GDAL page on GeoTIFF, it supports LZW and DEFLATE lossless compression, as well as lossy JPEG compression. Client applications are possibly more likely to support native JPEG decompression (that's just educated guesswork on my part however) So I'd be inclined to divide up your imagery into tiles first, then apply JPEG compression to each tile.

As an alternative, as GeoServer maintains its own image metadata (which is stored directly in GeoTIFFs), you could skip the TIFF-JPEG part, and compress them directly as JPEG files using gdal_translate.

I'd also try the other compression types to see what sort of storage/speed trade-off you get and make your decision based on that.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.