<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Chris Leather <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chris@a-connect.co.uk">chris@a-connect.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial">Hi,</span></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial"> </span></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial">I'm trying to create charts from NOAA data and have
almost cracked it BUT as you can see from the attached graphic, I'm
ending up with a jagged 'shadow' around the coasts where the data
stops.</span></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial"> </span></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial">I figure what I need to do is somehow extrapolate the data
using something like nearest neighbour algorithm. </span></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial"></span></font></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What exactly are yo trying to accomplish? 1) Are you trying to have values over land or 2) have the boundary of data/no-data following a smoother coastline? Extrapolating data over land is very controversial, and in the few cases when this is done (for example, for sea level pressure) this is extrapolation is done from "above" by reducing the fields to a certain standard pressure level. Now, having the data following a smoother coastline is not exactly a trivial endeavor.</div>
<div><br></div><div> Arlindo</div><div><br></div></div>-- <br>Arlindo da Silva<br><a href="mailto:dasilva@alum.mit.edu">dasilva@alum.mit.edu</a><br>
</div>