Sentinel hub pixel picker how to#

“crs”: įirst of all we should clarify: if you’d like to get the data from SH aligned with the original grid, you should use process API (or sentinelhub-py). Do you have any suggestion to make better attempts?Īlso, to respond to your last reply I would gladly take in some more details about this matter, if possible ! I would say that the method is not working, so far -unless I did not understand what you meant. As I can’t use GEOJSON as input in EO Browser, the last bullet point cannot be verified.The resolution issue may be linked to the conversion to KML.

The pixel resolution is not 10 meter (10^-1 precision).The EO Browser output file is not aligned with Sentinel2 grid in all cases.I don’t really know if I did anything wrong compared to what you suggested (except for the part where the EPSG was not UTM), but in conclusion of what I tried: I finally tried with the EPSG:32637 WGS 84 / UTM Zone 37N using multiples of 10 to define the extend, but the output is still not aligned with the Sentinel2 grid. POLYGON((4208350 815070, 4208350 815140, 4208400 815140, 4208400 815070, 4208350 815070))ĬRS EPSG:3857 - WGS 84 / Pseudo-Mercator (I took the same as the outputs from EO Browser, even thought it’s not UTM and thus spherical -I suspected it would not work but tried anyways).Īnd yes, once again, the output file is not aligned with Sentinel2 grid either. I tried with another projection, so I did once again a WKT with the following arguments: See at the end of the post if you’re interested in the file itself.īut what’s more critical is that the output TIFF is not aligned with the Sentinel-2 grid. EPSG:20137 - Adindan / UTM 37N) but when I uploaded it in EO Browser, the area displayed was totally wrong. I exported a GEOJSON of the WKT using QGIS (in the same CRS, i.e.

Sentinel hub pixel picker how to#

Thus, because the area is not exactly the same, the pixel size is not exactly at 10m either, which is one of the main issues in my case.ĭoes anyone have any idea how to make a better job than this ? at a 10^-1 level) and I guess it’s coming from the reprojection from WKT to KML (which is automatically ESPG:4326), however I was wondering: what is the level of precision of EO Browser regarding KML input / area delimitations? So as you can see, the area of the WKT and of the output TIFF is not exactly the same -I know it’s quite similar (i.e. Here are some outputs of the EO Browser band file: I chose the option Popular Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) (Projected resolution: 10 m/px). Then, I made a KML using QGIS and used the KML file as input for EO Browser. I made a CSV file using WKT with the following poly: I tried using a KML defined with multiples of 10 for coordinates, based on a UTM EPSG. Once again, I tried looking this up in the documentation but was unsuccessful.

How can I get a TIFF using the Sentinel 2 grid and not the grid that fits my KML ? I tested this hypothesis by downloading a tile from the ESA hub and compared the pixel grids: indeed, the grid from my EO Browser TIFFs did not align with the ESA file grid.Ĭan someone tell me how the output is produced in terms of pixel grid ? Is there any resampling involved ? It is linked to the downscaling / upscaling discussed in my previous topic ? It seems very unlikely that all of my KML are perfectly aligned with the Sentinel 2 10m pixel grid. I noticed that the pixel grid of the output TIFF aligns exactly with the KML shape for all my plots -and there are twelve of them. I used KML files as inputs, which defined my ROIs. I downloaded some images from EO Browser, using both the web app and the eo learn package. I’m bringing this topic back as I have a new related question -please let me know if I should rather open a new topic !