-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Updates to re-pull code #85
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All looks good to me! Did a pretty thorough read through the bit logic and conversions for each mission and everything lines up.
@@ -46,9 +48,11 @@ def applyScaleFactors_89(image): | |||
""" | |||
opticalBands = image.select("SR_B.").multiply(0.0000275).add(-0.2) | |||
thermalBands = image.select("ST_B..").multiply(0.00341802).add(149.0) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This may be due to my minimal Python skills but just flagging in case this double period in "ST_B.." is a typo. Since it doesn't seem the thermal bands are used downstream maybe this is moot but just a small thing I noticed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good eye! I could have just written that one out since it's only one band, but it's meant as selecting any band that starts with "ST_B" and is followed by two characters (..
) - alternatives: ST_B.*
which would select anything that starts with "ST_B", has any character, and then is of any length (*
). This is all to say, no, it doesn't matter because I don't end up using those bands later, but it would work for selecting "ST_B10". :) More detail here, if you are interested at all!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah got it, thank you! I love learning things in PRs 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
YAY!!!!! Goal has been achieved!!
Rockstar. Thank you @ccmothes! I'll have another one incoming today or tomorrow. |
Hey Caitlin!
I decided to break up what I thought was the first PR into two - just to make things easier to review. It looks bigger than it is, I promise.
Changes here are tweaks to the re-pull for the volunteer locations. Specifically, we added a few QA summaries to the reducer for each of the missions to help with our assessment of data quality in scripts that you'll see in the next PR.
This should be pretty short-and-sweet (like hopefully less than 30 mins), with the bulk of the 'review' in the eePlumB/2_data_ingestion/re_pull_functions.py script. Though I'm just seeing that I didn't add docstring to all of the functions - hopefully they are straightforward. I created #84 so I remember to come back to it.
We are storing data in this repository, since they are small files and it works better for outside collaborators.
This is when I need you to wear your GEE hat. Is my bit logic correct? Did I convert from DN correctly? Basically, rudimentary check to make sure I don't add unnecessary error into the pipeline!
This is progress on #42, #75 and #77.