LINZ versus OpenTopography
Both services can be the right answer. They expose overlapping products for different workflows.
| Need | LINZ | OpenTopography |
|---|---|---|
| official survey metadata/licensor | strongest source | carries derived collection metadata |
| latest individual regional survey | usually first choice | national mosaic may lag newest update |
| original point cloud | yes, survey datasets | available for selected point-cloud collections, not identical to national raster workflow |
| national 1 m terrain/surface mosaic | yes | yes, convenient DTM/DSM interface |
| small AOI extraction | LDS export or cloud tools | particularly convenient portal workflow |
| terrain derivatives | GIS / Basemaps / processing | portal processing tools |
| national cloud COG access | AWS | raster services/catalogues |
| APIs/STAC | LDS APIs; AWS/STAC ecosystem varies by product | REST APIs + explicit raster STAC catalogue |
Default recommendation
For a first terrain map of a small area, OpenTopography is extremely convenient. For research where date, original point classification or survey lineage matters, return to LINZ.
Reproducibility
Whichever route you use, save:
- dataset name
- survey or collection date range
- source URL
- download date
- horizontal and vertical CRS
- derivative settings
A hillshade without its source DEM and illumination settings is hard to reproduce later.
Last reviewed: 26 August 2026