@csandberg303 minor suggestion to ensure functionality

[esgeo]

@csandberg303

Please see the comments on the code in your PR #28

Review Checklist
CI Checks

The notebook runs from start to finish on all operating systems:

• Mac
• Windows
• Linux

Reproducibility

• Are the data downloaded in the code
• Are paths created to ensure they work on all operating systems (using os.path.join) (#28 (comment))
• Are comments used to clarify the contents of the code that can’t be clarified using expressive variable and function names alone? (not too many comments - just enough)
• Does the notebook run from start to finish?

PEP 8 standards & Code Readability
Functions

• Do functions follow PEP 8 format conventions?
• Are function docstrings clear (all inputs and outputs clearly described and defined)
• Are function names expressive (the name describes what the function does)?
• Are functions easy to understand and read?
• How many tasks does each function do? (ideally a function does one thing well). One of the functions: process_single_scene is quite multimodal

Package imports

• Are standard modules (those included with the base python install) vs. third party (related but externally developed tools) import groups correct with appropriate spacing in between each group? _One or two modules included but not used_#28 (comment)
• Are variable names throughout the code, expressive?
  Suggest changes if not, highlight what was done well
• Is the code overall easy to understand and read? Are there things that would make it more clear / cleaner?
  DRY Code
• Are segments of code repeated in the file or is the code DRY?
• Are loops used to optimize DRY code?
• Are functions used to optimize DRY code?
• Are there any areas that could be potentially improved (you can suggest improvements OR you can just highlight parts of the code where you suspect it could be cleaner / more efficient. #28 (comment)
  Novel Approaches to Problem solving
• Highlight any novel approaches to completing the assignment.
  I'm somewhat torn because I think your function that was multimodal (and therefore frowned upon) was also really powerful!
  #28 (comment)

Great work, reviewing your code was enjoyable and easy, and was even moreso because Mitchell had already been through it before me!

[csandberg303]

Thank you Eric! I was fun to have two reviewers, and I thought you had a bit of a complex review when you were commenting on Mitchell's comments, as well as my original code. I appreciate your observations I'm better off because of it.