Tell me more ×
Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for cartographers, geographers and GIS professionals. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Background This is my second question related to georeferencing naked raster maps in order to re-visualize them on different coordinate systems and in conjunction with other data layers. The previous question is at Convert an arbitrary meta-data-free map image into QGIS project

Problem My goal is to georeference this map:

Eurasian steppe, Encyc. Brit.?

This does not appear to be Plate-Carrée. So in QGIS, I created several reasonable control points, which for completeness I have attached at the bottom [ref:1]. I provide QGIS Georeferencer the same target SRS as my project file, EPSG:4326. I get exceptionally poor results with Helmert and the polynomial transforms but get a reasonable image with thin plate spline (which makes the resulting geoestimate go through my control points). However, even this result is poor, e.g., at higher latitudes (see the Russian coast north of Japan). This is a screenshot of my QGIS screen using a Natural Earth background.

QGIS georeference result, thin plate spline

Alternative path I tried a similar exercise with the much easier-to-use tool at MapWarper: see the result and control points at http://mapwarper.net/maps/758#Preview_Map_tab where I get poorer results (probably due to the fact that I added fewer control points).

Questions in nutshell

  1. Are there are any tricks I'm missing to getting a good georeference?
  2. Is this projection instantly recognizable?
  3. At Unknown Coordinate System on old drawing, gdaltransform is suggested to transform several coordinate points into a several target SRS, with the goal of actually uncovering the projection parameters used to generate the original map. I tried something like this: after saving my QGIS list of points, I did some string processing to get a list of space-separated long/lats via cat eurasian-steppe-gcp.points | tail -n+2 | cut -d, -f1-2 | sed 's/,/ /'> tmp.txt and inputting the resulting file into gdaltransform: gdaltransform -s_srs EPSG:3785 -t_srs EPSG:4326 < tmp.txt and switching the s_srs and t_srs flags (the project uses EPSG:4326). I know I'm shooting in the dark, hoping to get lucky, so I wasn't surprised when I couldn't make sense of the outputs. Can someone expand on how I would use this method to find the best estimate of the source map's projection and projection parameters? My thinking behind this is that rather than messing with placing myriad control points for a good georeference, might it be easier to get a near-perfect georeference with fewer control points, just looping through all the common coordinate systems? Does it involve cross-validation of each point against all the others, for each CRS under test?

I'd like to get an understanding of either this algorithm or of georeferencing so I can automate the process---I run into this issue all the time, and until content creators stop treating their maps as one-off creations never to be integrated with other content, I don't expect to stop.

References

[ref:1] QGIS GCP file:

mapX,mapY,pixelX,pixelY,enable
142.632649100000009,54.453595900000003,505.941176470588232,-95.220588235293974,1
154.934252200000003,59.559921699999997,536.411764705882206,-52.779411764705742,1
80.080158100000006,9.657192300000000,291.558823529411711,-322.661764705882206,1
10.448442600000000,57.819128900000003,21.676470588235190,-103.926470588235134,1
34.007173000000002,27.761438299999998,101.117647058823422,-244.852941176470466,1
50.950890399999999,11.862196600000001,171.852941176470495,-313.955882352941046,1
29.713217199999999,60.024133200000001,90.779411764705799,-92.499999999999829,1
60.000000000000000,0.000000000000000,208.308823529411683,-362.382352941176350,1
69.867506500000005,66.639146199999999,224.088235294117567,-33.191176470588061,1
27.276107100000001,71.049154799999997,89.147058823529306,-21.764705882352814,1
140.000000000000000,0.000000000000000,536.955882352941217,-362.926470588235190,1
20.000000000000000,0.000000000000000,43.441176470588132,-362.926470588235190,1
20.196882700000000,31.243024100000000,47.249999999999901,-231.794117647058698,1
9.171861099999999,42.848309999999998,8.073529411764603,-175.205882352941046,1
131.955786100000012,43.196468600000003,481.999999999999943,-162.691176470588090,1
73.813303700000006,45.169367200000003,256.735294117646959,-161.602941176470438,1
50.602731800000001,44.589102900000000,168.044117647058727,-167.588235294117510,1
121.394975900000006,18.941421099999999,455.882352941176407,-284.029411764705742,1
103.987047000000004,1.417439300000000,389.499999999999943,-357.485294117646959,1
109.325478599999997,55.962283100000001,380.249999999999943,-98.485294117646902,1
31.454010100000001,46.562001500000001,95.132352941176379,-158.882352941176322,1
43.639560299999999,68.844150499999998,137.573529411764611,-40.264705882352814,1
share|improve this question
That should be a Mercator projection (the parallels are not equidistant). – bhell Dec 11 '12 at 6:30
I'm wrong: Mercator of course should have parallel meridians. Maybe van der Grinten? – bhell Dec 11 '12 at 6:54
Have you tried adding some control points in the far north? Every place else looks fine but there it seems it's missing some more information. – underdark Dec 11 '12 at 7:58
@underdark, good point, I just added several more points at the northern latitudes at mapwarper.net (you should be able to see them now), but the fit up there is still quite terrible (see Scandinavia and northwest Russia). This tells me that the warping mapwaper.net is applying isn't a good fit for this projection. – Ahmed Fasih Dec 11 '12 at 11:45
1  
Ah, so the image can't be converted into a Van der Grinten projection (which I am familiar with because it's used in an 'upside-down' map on my wall :) via any affine transform. Good to know! – Ahmed Fasih Dec 11 '12 at 21:56
show 3 more comments

Know someone who can answer? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook.

Your Answer

 
discard

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.