Hi Matt,

I am trying to export a map with shaded relief and receiving this message:

No output files generated by the IMC after raster map generation process. Please check your map export settings, and contact ReefMaster support if you did not expect this result.


at #=qufRPUK$12bXhYT8LFlTXpvzviRR6HuF5TBM2Qc6BmkP0rjgHdbKxsWlidWbbqlcs.#=qTFgm9OdYjSf2K2R0wxr2lA==(AT5ExportOptions #=qG4ciXmlsQ0Nj290h0fGVKw==, String #=qAmUvsE0DuyvAyskV9Scvzg==, GeographicExtent #=qRKY5eI0aQRPBuYoOVkPsHQ==, Func`3 #=qIJosxGVD36WAXciVE73pWw==, String #=qsK5vJK9nhkPA2yioUHgaP1kMR4S6ArWJWarwEMblPF0=, String #=q3K9C7tWl4dAX8r7OR1cgxA==, String #=qsd$KIloiMSXnMyXs1l4f05IyOcq9to$eQwIfqzuZdaQ=)

I am trying to use Project based naming without Atlas description.

Hi Riba,
If you try to export the same map as an image, at a similar resolution to your AT5 raster (you can cross reference the metres per pixel/pixels per metre fields), is the export successful? You will probably need to select the "tile" option for the image, as a single image map be too big.
The IMC is not generating output, which could be for a few reasons - but I think a lack of input files is the most likely.
I would also be interested to see the project (size, selected layers) if you are willing to share it (file sharing service and link to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. - I would also need any image .mbtiles files if you have background image layers).

Hi Matt, thank you for the answer!
I will try to do what you suggested.
Can you advise me what would be the best way to export my projects?
I have 32 Map Projects. In RM1 I used to use a set of maps and I would rebuild each map I change and include it in the set and then export the set to an at5 file (for displaying on HDS gen2). I was exporting vector layers only.
Now, it is done in a different way. There are no sets any more. OK, I can just select all my map projects and make at5.xml and large.at5 files. But now there is also an opportunity to use Project based naming so I wouldn't have to export the map projects I didn't change each time? How do I do this? at5.xml file is each time overwriting. I use BC layer also and I would like to export Shaded relief layer too and probably add an OSM base map.
How will I do all of this? I seem to have some problems when I export a project by project. For some projects there is a shaded relief and for some there is no shaded relief. I also tried to export two projects with all layers including shaded relief with project based naming and then export them together without raster layers to get common at5.xml file and it worked but not perfect. In shaded releif view there were parts of maps missing and appearing when zooming in...?

Hi Matt and everybody else!

I have installed the new IMC version and now I am not getting the message I have posted before. Still, I would like to know the answer to the questions from my last post. I have tried to export several projects again with all layers including shaded relief with project based naming and then export them together without raster layers to get common at5.xml file and it does work but not perfect. In shaded relief view there were parts of maps missing and appearing when zooming in...? Somehow, in between two neighboring maps there is a gap that is getting smaller as I zoom in. Also, some maps are overlapping and they didn't do that when I had one large.at5 file? Is there any other way to export all this to work properly?

Good to hear that the first problem was resolved with the later IMC - are you running 0.7.4 now?

The way you are exporting ShadedRelief is exactly how I would recommend you do it. I would be interested in seeing a screen shot of the unit showing the issue. Is it just the SR that is displaying incorrectly, or the vector as well?

Yes I am running 0.7.4 now.
OK, yesterday I have exported several projects with all layers including shaded relief with project based naming and then exported them together without raster layers to get common at5.xml file.
Here are some screen shots of what I have gotten.

The order of the photos is a bit mixed up.
Second photo is showing a gap in shaded relief view.
On the first photo you can see how the gap is getting smaller as I zoom in.
The last photo is showing the hardness layer of the complete area.
Third and fourth photo are showing another area where hardness and isobaths layers are overlapping.
Fifth and sixth photo are showing how it used to look when exported without raster layers and project based naming in RM1.

Hello, I have discovered something more!

I exported with RM2 together just the two project that are overlapping in vector layers without raster layers. I've gotten at5.xml and large.at5 files but when I put it in my HDS the maps are still overlapping (photo 3). On photos 1 and 2 you can see the boundaries of each project. They shouldn't overlap. When exported with RM1 they don't overlap as you saw on the photos I posted before.
So this seems to be the RM2 version problem and probably doesn't have to do anything with map parts missing in shaded relief view?

Hi Riba,
Would it be possible to share your workspace via a filesharing service and send the link to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.? Also please let me know which projects you are talking about. I would like to test this on a system here.

No problem. I will send you the workspace

I think the shaded relief issue is to do with the way the IMC (and Navico units) create raster layers in "blocks". This means that, unless the SR export is precisely aligned with IMC block boundaries, you will get an area around each raster export - in your case it looks like RM's default background fill colour (if you didn't use any fill colour here, it would be black). I don't think there is a way around this, so I would suggest that for any contiguous maps, you need to export the SR in one go. I would only suggest using project based naming and separate SR exports if your maps are separate to each other - e.g. a number of different lakes. I initially thought that was what you were doing, but now it makes more sense.

The vector overlap is a weird one that I have not seen before - will need to look at this more closely. When you view the maps within RM, do you see the same overlap? You could try creating a new, empty project and copying the isobath layers from both of those maps to the new project so that you can view them together. If they look OK in RM but not in the IMC then that will need further investigation - we have done quite a bit of testing on exporting maps in sections and haven't seen anything like this.

I've had a look at the vector maps in your workspace. There does seem to be an issue whereby RM is not truncating the northern edge of your lower map. This is a bit strange, and we will have to look into it to find out what is going on. It does not appear that there is any issue with the export (what you see in the unit is the same as what I see in RM), and the maps are not displaced. There is just a small region of overlap.

Top image shows both separate maps - note the mouse tracer, which is circled in the left map:



Combining both maps together into a single new map (just copying over the isobath layers), and setting the same fixed depth palette for both:




So in summary - there is something going on with the map boundary truncating, but as far as I can tell it is not affecting the map position in any way. We will look into it and I will update you when we have an answer.