Currently we use a series of binary_dilation to propagate NaNs to a certain pixel distance in interp_points, but this seems to match the L1 norm (abs(dX) + abs(dY)) and not a classic euclidean distance.
Should we change this scheme to an euclidean distance instead? (same calculation as Raster.proximity())
Would this better match the reason for the nodata propagation? (=size of interpolation kernels for linear/cubic/quintic methods)
Currently we use a series of
binary_dilationto propagate NaNs to a certain pixel distance ininterp_points, but this seems to match the L1 norm (abs(dX) + abs(dY)) and not a classic euclidean distance. Should we change this scheme to an euclidean distance instead? (same calculation asRaster.proximity()) Would this better match the reason for the nodata propagation? (=size of interpolation kernels for linear/cubic/quintic methods)See original mention below:
_Originally posted by @rhugonnet in https://github.com/GlacioHack/geoutils/pull/560#discussion_r1742793245_