<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Ahh, yes you're right! :-) </div><div><br></div><div><img height="240" width="240" apple-width="yes" apple-height="yes" src="cid:28B66285-85F1-438F-AFAF-6FE5C1D9E62B@du.ae"><img height="240" width="240" apple-width="yes" apple-height="yes" src="cid:8267EE76-15A3-4644-AA48-D4EC44359ED5@du.ae"><img height="240" width="240" apple-width="yes" apple-height="yes" src="cid:26A090F7-56CC-4356-BE12-2FFA99A21F70@du.ae"></div><div><br></div><div>Mount St. Helen's was supposed to be in the center, <b>but each cell sample is only 90m x 90m</b>. I used the 3 arc-seconds (90m) sample data. So, I guess I need to import a larger surface area and then try to re-construct Mount St. Helen's in 3D. </div><div><br></div><div>Any tips or pointers on how I can tile multiple raster images containing elevation data to reconstruct a 3D terrain over a larger area? I can try this out immediately and then compare it with the 3D surface reconstructed using the VTK supplied St.Helens DEM ASCII file.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Elvis Dowson</div><div><br></div><div><div>On Oct 13, 2008, at 7:00 PM, David Cole wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Try swapping the left and right images. They look to me like they'll line up perfectly if you reverse the order... (123 w is wester/lefter than 121 w...)<br><br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>