Hi Oshyan,
oh sorry, I was totally frustrated... But now I am really very happy to hear that you wanted to response to my problem... So I will repeat my answer now.
No, I did't solve it. If I would have been able to solve it, I would have told it and the way how I did manage it, so that other users can use the information if they will also have this problem some day. Moreover, yesterday I tried it again and I feel even more confused:
The coordinates (corners of the satellite image) presented in the next figure are not correct (I changed them to be able to see the image within the area of the heighfield. If I use the correct coordinates I can not see that image...). They should be:
NW 41.251106 35.387016
NE 41.251106 35.485490
SE 41.186399 35.485490
SW 41.186399 35.387016
so the difference of this area should be (very roughly) north-south: 0.07 degrees and east-west: 0.10 degrees (same differences as for the image draped in this figure:)
[attach=1]
but according to this figure, this is not correct. The area covered by the image is pretty too small. Moreover I had to exchange the latitudes of the northern and southern corners to get the correct orientation of the image. The orientation of the heighfield is correct. Why? What I am doing wrong?
Well, here is my removed reply:
Yes, I try to georeference manually a jpg. It has no embedded georeferencing data. The source of the image data are Ground Penetration Radar data.
The heighfield data were downloaded from
http://opentopo.sdsc.edu/ as well the corresponding satellite picture (just to be able to control the results):
[attach=2]
I georeferenced this image using:
[attach=3]
This is the jpg I want to drap:
[attach=4]
and geoereferenced this jpg using:
[attach=5]
But the result is pretty strange (location and orientation of the satellite image is not correct):
[attach=6]
The correct position of the jpg would be (please note the circle):
[attach=7]
I really would like to know what I am doing wrong....
Again, thanks a lot for every small hint...
Harry