Support Website Contact Support Blog

State Plane Coordinate Systems

I am wondering about the difference between the Pix4D state plane coordinate system for Montana and the ArcMAP and AutoCAD coordinate systems shown below. As you can see this can get confusing very fast.

Our surveyors prefer the state plane, international foot units for surveys in Montana. When importing GCP points Pix4D doesn’t have this option for the state plane international foot. I am wondering what is the best coordinate system to use when importing GPS controlled points and then what is the best output coordinate system.  

 

Pix4D - NAD_1983_StatePlane_Montana_FIPS_2500_Feet                               Code: ESRI: 102700 (US Foot)

Pix4D - NAD83 / Montana (ft)                                                                               Code: EPSG: 2256 (Int. Foot)

 

ArcMAP - NAD_1983_StatePlane_Montana_FIPS_2500_Feet_Intl                     Code: EPSG: 2256 (Int. Foot)

 

ArcMap - NAD_1983_StatePlane_Montana_FIPS_2500                                      Code: EPSG: 32100 (Meter)

 

AutoCAD Coordinate System - NAD83 Montana State Planes, International Foot     Code: Unknown (Int. Foot)

Which would you need to working in, US feet or international feet.

Assuming its ellipsoid 2256 / US feet?

Aw, I see…Florida is a bit different, 102658.

Hello,

I have done a quick search on the internet to answer your question about the difference s between the coordinate systems:

ESRI 102700:

PROJCS[“NAD83 / Montana (ft)”,
   GEOGCS[“NAD83”,
       DATUM[“North_American_Datum_1983”,
           SPHEROID[“GRS 1980”,6378137,298.257222101,
               AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“7019”]],
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“6269”]],
       PRIMEM[“Greenwich”,0,
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“8901”]],
       UNIT[“degree”,0.01745329251994328,
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“9122”]],
       AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“4269”]],
   UNIT[“foot”,0.3048,
       AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“9002”]],
   PROJECTION[“Lambert_Conformal_Conic_2SP”],
   PARAMETER[“standard_parallel_1”,49],
   PARAMETER[“standard_parallel_2”,45],
   PARAMETER[“latitude_of_origin”,44.25],
   PARAMETER[“central_meridian”,-109.5],
   PARAMETER[“false_easting”,1968503.937],
   PARAMETER[“false_northing”,0],
   AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“2256”],
   AXIS[“X”,EAST],
   AXIS[“Y”,NORTH]]

EPSG 2256:

PROJCS[“NAD83 / Montana (ft)”,
   GEOGCS[“NAD83”,
       DATUM[“North_American_Datum_1983”,
           SPHEROID[“GRS 1980”,6378137,298.257222101,
               AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“7019”]],
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“6269”]],
       PRIMEM[“Greenwich”,0,
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“8901”]],
       UNIT[“degree”,0.01745329251994328,
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“9122”]],
       AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“4269”]],
   UNIT[“foot”,0.3048,
       AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“9002”]],
   PROJECTION[“Lambert_Conformal_Conic_2SP”],
   PARAMETER[“standard_parallel_1”,49],
   PARAMETER[“standard_parallel_2”,45],
   PARAMETER[“latitude_of_origin”,44.25],
   PARAMETER[“central_meridian”,-109.5],
   PARAMETER[“false_easting”,1968503.937],
   PARAMETER[“false_northing”,0],
   AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“2256”],
   AXIS[“X”,EAST],
   AXIS[“Y”,NORTH]]

EPSG 32100

PROJCS[“NAD83 / Montana”,
   GEOGCS[“NAD83”,
       DATUM[“North_American_Datum_1983”,
           SPHEROID[“GRS 1980”,6378137,298.257222101,
               AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“7019”]],
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“6269”]],
       PRIMEM[“Greenwich”,0,
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“8901”]],
       UNIT[“degree”,0.01745329251994328,
           AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“9122”]],
       AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“4269”]],
   UNIT[“metre”,1,
       AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“9001”]],
   PROJECTION[“Lambert_Conformal_Conic_2SP”],
   PARAMETER[“standard_parallel_1”,49],
   PARAMETER[“standard_parallel_2”,45],
   PARAMETER[“latitude_of_origin”,44.25],
   PARAMETER[“central_meridian”,-109.5],
   PARAMETER[“false_easting”,600000],
   PARAMETER[“false_northing”,0],
   AUTHORITY[“EPSG”,“32100”],
   AXIS[“X”,EAST],
   AXIS[“Y”,NORTH]]

The difference between Pix4D - NAD_1983_StatePlane_Montana_FIPS_2500_Feet (ESRI 102700) and ArcMAP - NAD_1983_StatePlane_Montana_FIPS_2500_Feet_Intl (EPSG 2256) is the units, International Feet or US foot, which makes the “False easting” also change.

The ArcMap - NAD_1983_StatePlane_Montana_FIPS_2500 is equivalent to both, but it is defined in meters.

There is no best coordinate system to use when importing GPS controlled points or best output coordinate system.  It depends on what is the systems your GCPs are givem to or the output system you want to use.

In case Pix4D does not include a system in its database (as it happens with 102700 and 2256) you can import the definition via “From PRJ…” and use it.

If I understand well, you would like to work with state plane, international foot units. If that is the case, I would recommend using the system with ID 102700 but it has to be imported from the “From PRJ…” button.

Please let me know if this explanation answers your questions.

Hi again,

I forgot to mention that you can also have a look at this post which has to do with the use of US foot or Int Feet:

https://community.pix4d.com/t/7130-orthomosaic-not-lining-up-with-Google-Earth 

Regards

Hi

I am trying to process a flight mission I did on Birmingham Alabama United States WITH GCPs. I post-process some coordinates using the EMLID Reach RS. The routine process I do is to change the coordinate system to feet, advance coordinate options and select From List - Datum: NAD83 (National Spatial Reference System 2011) and generally I would select the State. However, Alabama is not listed in this coordinated system.

Is it missing in the list, is it writhing differently? I am supposed to do something differently? Are all 50 US states listed at all?

Any help would be appreciated. 

Thanks!

Hello,

Do you know the EPSG code of your coordinate system?

I guess you should use one of these:

Please notice that these systems are defined in US feet not int feet.

Regards.