as promised ... here is lasvalidate.exe ... which will become the
(in-)official LAS/LAZ validator from rapidlasso and become an integral
part of LAStools with the next release scheduled for later this week.
It includes a GEOTIFF tag check for all the geo-encodings currently
supported by LAStools (e.g. UTM, state planes, generic transform
mercator, generic lambertian conic conformal, and longlat) with more
being added as your complaints stream in. It also supports reading the
compressed LAZ format now. If you are pre-LAStools-release curious ...
the direct link to the current executable is here (click "view raw" to
Or get the complete package here ... the LINUX makefiles should work now.
git clone https://github.com/LASvalidator/LASread.git
git clone https://github.com/LASvalidator/lasvalidate.git
lasvalidate -i your_file.las
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Martin Isenburg
> Hello folks,
> a few of you have inquired over the past weeks whatever happened to my
> bid for the ASPRS LAS Validation Suite. It's been ... aehhhm ...
> funny. I received a serious and professional looking letter marked
> "business confidential" that said that I was selected to do the work
> ... but only on the precondition that I sign a document that more or
> less said that I would only be able to talk about the development via
> an official ASPRS channel. Why was that funny? Well, if you read my
> bid then you know that at its very core was the intention to do the
> entire development in an open and transparent manner that would invite
> early and frequent community feedback. So it is still a mystery to me
> why my bid was selected in the first place. Zähneknirschend (fig.
> German) I decided to sign the "silencer" ... I was worried that the
> alternative might be worse. The next funny thing was that the ASPRS
> LAS committee members did not seem informed about all this. Instead a
> "secret" technical review panel was deciding things. But the funniest
> thing was that a couple of weeks after me signing the dreaded
> "silencer" I was told that the ASPRS was canning whole project.
> Shortly thereafter the ASPRS Executive Director announced his
> retirement and I personally like to think - just because it makes it
> even funnier - that this was somehow related to the LAS Validation
> Suite contract fiasko ... (-;
> Okay. Enough funny. Now serious. I have sunk many hours into this
> project and would like to complete its development in open souce. The
> main thing that is lacking for completion is the CRSscan library for
> the GeoTIFF versus OCG WKT validation. I was thinking just calling the
> right functions of GTIFF and GDAL could do this. I looked through
> Frank Wanderdam's code and it seems fairly straight forward. To keep
> the tool nice and small - like the original ASPRS LVS tender was
> calling for - it would be nice to "rip" only those parts out of GTIFF
> and GDAL that are needed to read the Geokey projection tags and the
> OCG WKT string. We would then initialize a projection once from the
> Geokey tags and once from the OGC WKT string and make sure they are
> the same. For the time being I'd be happy if we support 98% (?!?) of
> all cases by focusing on the most common projections such as UTM,
> generic TM, generic LCC, generic OM, stateplanes, and latlong.
> I just updated the github repository with all the necessary source
> code to compile the current version of lasvalidate.exe (the LINUX
> Makefile are untested and may still have a few errors).
> Martin @rapidlasso
> PS: Would be great to have some agency / company / institute funding the effort.
- fast tools for all you LiDARs
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Martin Isenburg
>> to anyone who has followed what's been happening in these two
>> discussion groups it will probably not come as a surprise to hear that
>> rapidlasso GmbH has submitted a bid to the ASPRS call for proposals
>> for implementing the LAS Validation Suite (LVS). The fundamental
>> premise of our bid is to implement the LAS validation tool through an
>> open process that invites early feedback.
>> Providing an "official correctness check" for LAS files and especially
>> that of the Coordinate Reference System is likely to spark emotional
>> discussions. We doubt that any one party will - on their own and
>> behind closed doors - be able to develop a comprehensive LAS
>> validation software that will find acceptance by an already "slightly
>> suspicious" LiDAR community. We believe an open approach will disarm
>> any notions that such a software could be used as a "lock-out"
>> mechanism, will make the validation tool quickly available for
>> professional use, and will find result in a acceptance by the LiDAR
>> To make our bid as strong as possible we have completed a partial
>> prototype of the LAS Validation Suite. With this we do not only want
>> to demonstrate our technical capability but also illustrates the way
>> we plan to inject transparency into the development process. The tool
>> is using the open source LASlibrary API which was designed
>> particularly for this bid. The LASlibrary package is an unrestricted
>> open source (LGPL 2.1) API to read LAS (optionally also LAZ) files. It
>> is a completely re-engineered subset of the LASlib API of LAStools
>> that has been drastically simplified to better suit the
>> being-light-weight-requirement of the ASPRS' request for proposals.
>> You can find this prototype tool, example input and output, our bid,
>> the call for proposals, and a few other goodies here:
>> I invite you to run the 'lasvalidate.exe' prototype tool on your own
>> data, report bugs and other findings, suggest improvements to the XML
>> output, and else ...
>> prototype validation tool:
>> example data:
>> collection unit tests (in progress):
>> No CRS handling is implemented yet. This is likely to be the most
>> tricky part. Using the "gold standard" by combining GeoTIFF with GDAL
>> and proj4 seems the way to go but may require some code juggling if we
>> want to minimize the amount of code dependencies on other packages.
>> Martin @rapidlasso
>> PS: Please only post replies in "The LAS room" user forum since this
>> is not about LAStools but about the LAS format.