GIS 5935 LAB 2.1

The objectives for this week's lab were to create 3D visualizations of elevation models, create and modify a TIN using various input datasets, compare TIN and DEM elevation models in terms of properties and derivatives. Beginning with the first part of this lab, Part A, draping an image over a terrain surface, the outcome was learning the basics of local 2D/3D scenes, how to navigate and display TINS/Elevation Surfaces. Next, part B involved using a DEM to develop a ski run suitability map, and the outcome of this was a suitability map showing the slope, aspect and reclassification suitability rasters as a 3D scene with a weighted overlay. The following section of the lab, part C, focused on exploring TINS, primarily the symbology and the meaning behind the symbology, for example: slope, edges and aspect. The end goal was symbology that displayed both the slope, edges and contours. Finally, part D was the creation of a TIN and the analyzing of the created TIN using the Create TIN and Spline geoprocessing tools. The end result were two maps comparing the TIN and DEM elevation models, and to pose the question of which one is more accurate, and why. Referencing the Bolstad readings for this week, chapter 11 focused on Terrain Analysis and directly correlates to this weeks lab assignments. Possible differences for the two models, as referenced by Bolstad on page 490, are differences in methods calculating slope and aspect. So, based off of this week's readings and the results from my lab, I can conclude that DelevTIN is more accurate than the DemTIN because of the fewer outlier contour lines, meaning most of the contour lines are in the same location vs the DemTIN which seemed to have contour lines scattered throughout the south and east. Ultimately, I am pretty satisfied with how this lab turned out, and enjoyed learning about terrain analysis and contour lines.