Skip to main content
Geographic Information Systems

Return to Question

added 120 characters in body
Source Link
Learner
Learner
  • 3.5k
  • 19
  • 34

This question is mainly for the validity of the comparison of the classification product of different types of spatial resolution.

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is converted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not to compare product of different spatial resolution?

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is converted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not to compare product of different spatial resolution?

This question is mainly for the validity of the comparison of the classification product of different types of spatial resolution.

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is converted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not to compare product of different spatial resolution?

Post Reopened by PolyGeo♦
added 52 characters in body
Source Link
Learner
Learner
  • 3.5k
  • 19
  • 34

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is convetedconverted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not to compare product of different spatial resolution?

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is conveted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not?

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is converted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not to compare product of different spatial resolution?

Post Closed as "Duplicate" by PolyGeo♦
Source Link
Learner
Learner
  • 3.5k
  • 19
  • 34

Is it scientifically valid to compare landcover/use generated from different types of spatial resolution products

Is it scientifically valid to compare very high-resolution image analysis product with that of moderate resolution. Say I have RapidEye image classification(8 class) of 2011 and forest loss pixels(just 3 class:forest loss, no forest loss, not applicable) of 2010 from landsat image products. Now I want to see what forest loss pixel of 2010 is conveted to what in 2011.

Is it scientifically valid or not?