Skip to content
Raster Analysis 1
The main focus of this lab was getting comfortable with ArcGIS Pro's raster analysis tools across a variety of different datasets, and it ended up covering a pretty wide range of techniques.
Figure 1 gets into something that might seem subtle but actually makes a big difference in practice: comparing how noise appears between two different hillshade rendering methods. Putting them side by side made it easy to see how the choice of display method can either obscure or clarify what's actually on the ground.
Figure 2 takes that a step further with a raster filter that shifts the visual feel entirely — instead of reading the terrain as shadows and light, the filtered version makes features feel like they're physically popping off the screen. It's a small tweak in processing but a pretty dramatic difference in how the data reads visually.
The Mount Shasta map was a nice change of pace — working with a well-known landmark made the elevation and hillshade outputs feel a lot more tangible and easier to interpret.
By far the most challenging part of the lab was building out the Cost Surface analysis for Duluth shown in Figure 5. The concept of cost surfaces — essentially mapping how difficult or expensive it is to move through a landscape — was newer territory, and connecting all the right tools in the right order took some trial and error. But once it clicked, it was one of the more satisfying results of the assignment because of how directly applicable it is.
Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.
This is not the way.
Try clicking the ··· in the right corner or using a keyboard shortcut (
CtrlP
) instead.