I can't project .tif into NAD_1983_Albers

[WoodrowFields]

When I try to reproject my .tif file from "WGS_1984_UTM_Zone_17N" to "NAD_1983_Albers" the resulting .tif projection is in "USA_Contiguous_Albers_Equal_Area_Conic_USGS_version" which is not "NAD_1983_Albers".  Does anyone know how to get a .tif to the NAD_1983_Albers projection?

[MelitaKennedy]

When I try to reproject my .tif file from "WGS_1984_UTM_Zone_17N" to "NAD_1983_Albers" the resulting .tif projection is in "USA_Contiguous_Albers_Equal_Area_Conic_USGS_version" which is not "NAD_1983_Albers".  Does anyone know how to get a .tif to the NAD_1983_Albers projection?

I bet this is the same projected coordinate system, but the original name has been changed. Some raster formats don't support all the capabilities that a shapefile (for instance) does when it comes to coordinate system. I'd expect this type of name to be more likely from an ESRI Grid than a tiff.

Melita

[WoodrowFields]

Thanks for the reply Melita!  I was thinking the same thing originally that this is the same projected coordinate system.  But when I try to load the reprojected tiff into an outside piece of software the imported .tif is nowhere near the other data which is in NAD_1983_Albers.  Another strange thing is that when I turn the layer frame projection off to stop on the fly projection the re-projected .tif lines up with the data that is in NAD_1983_Albers in ArcGIS.  Something is definitely strange here.

[WoodrowFields]

I think the software I am importing the .tif into is incorrectly reading the extents from the GeoTiff.  Does anyone know how to view the extent of a GeoTiff without ArcGIS?  I am hoping to confirm the extents with a third piece of software.

[WoodrowFields]

Sorry last post, I figured out that the software I am importing the .tif into reads the extents in meters when they should be in feet.  I reprojected the .tiff to NAD_1983_Albers, which is in feet.  the software that imports must find the extents in meters.  Therefore ArcMap must see the projection and convert the extent to be in feet.  That is my guess anyway.  Pretty frustrating.