Latest Contributions by LancasterGIS

Out statewide imagery is projected into NAD 1983 HARN (3753 and 54). When this imagery is brought into a new map in ArcGIS Pro for the corresponding state plane projection, for example NAD83 South (3735), ArcGIS Pro automatically applies the “NAD 1983 to HARN Ohio” transformation, however from everything I can find this transformation is mean to convert to the original NAD83, not NAD83 (2011) – see references below. Also, when I bring in GPS points (4 in accuracy - Trimble R2) collected using our DOT's RTK VRS network which uses the latest NAD revision, the do not align with the imagery when this transformation is being used. In ArcMap the user had to manually apply a transformation when bringing in data in projection different from the map projection. I am guessing that traditionally many people have just clicked yes in ArcMap to continue without applying a transformation when adding our state imagery, so this may not have been an issue in the past as few people noticed. So a couple things could be happening -  The imagery is not in the correct projection and/or has been incorrectly transformed into HARN. The default ArcGIS Pro transformation should not be used or is not appropriate. Something else... Further, from the links below it would seem there is no highly accurate transformation available from EPSG:3754 to EPSG:3735, since this shift would only be a few centimeters. So the question is should data in NAD83 HARN be transformed when projected to NAD83 2011? Possibly related to this topic -  https://community.esri.com/t5/map-projections-questions/nad83-to-nad83-harn-florida-transformation-seems/m-p/782627 References https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/324377/why-are-there-differences-in-output-position-between-the-arcgis-versus-ncat-tran https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/1115/cors-harn-transformations-what-is-the-most-accurate-method ... View more

In model builder, I have a table that when joined to a point feature would have a one-to-many relationship. When using a feature layer in a FGDB and a table in a FGDB, exporting a join between the two results in the one-to-many relationship, meaning more points are exported than existed in the initial point layer. When using in_memory for either the table or the feature layer, the one-to-many relationship is not maintained, and only a single point is exported from the join.  Any ideas? Is this expected behavior and a limit of the in_memory workspace?  ... View more

Webp has been around for 10 years and is 50-80% smaller than PNG but retains transparency unlike JPG. I use this format for ortho basemaps, but these do not seem to be supported in Collector/FieldMaps, though the API does support them as they work in third-party viewers that utilize the Esri JS API. It would be awesome if support could be added. ... View more