maptalk.co.nz News   |   Events   |   Forum   |   Photos   |   Links    

  Forum

Forum Home   Start New Topic   Edit Profile   Register  

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65  

Mapping

Show Profile  Melissa Posted: 14 January 2014, 11:22 AM  
You could also try Gordon Harris:
http://www.gordonharris.co.nz/drafting-film-c-607_703.html

Show Profile  Paul Posted: 14 January 2014, 12:34 PM  
I used to get mine from Aarque Graphics, one in Wellington and Auckland. 75 micron is quite thick making it hard to see through. I see Aarque has some double Matte Film at 50 microns, however single matte is even better to see through. They are selling A3, A4 and rolls however it is not cheap in anyone's language. It needs to be a dimensionally stable product, ie doesn't stretch, and also waterproof.
Selwyn is looking at getting a large order from somewhere as you can't easily source small amounts.
Selwyn if you find some put my name on the list for sharing a portion please!
http://www.aarque.co.nz/

Show Profile  Paul Posted: 14 January 2014, 12:52 PM  
Wow Ken, that's even bigger than mine. Great to see some really interesting printing developments and to have an orienteer keeping a close eye on these things and their suitability. Latest digital printing options should be part of the ISOM review.

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 3 February 2014, 4:41 PM  
Has anyone played around with the best way of mapping closed doors, or gates, that can be opened. It seems like it could be done without creating too much unfairness...thoughts? (sprint map)

Show Profile  The Map Guy Posted: 3 February 2014, 10:42 PM  
Regarding drafting film. I have tried reusing the same bit of film - managed to get 6 uses of the same bit of film and I'm sure I can get more use from it. I use coloured Staedtler 0.5mm pencil leads (hard to get too) which can be erased after I have scanned and drawn up the fieldwork.

Most of my field work involves extensive GPS use with lots of notes about the waypoints (in graphic shorthand like we used to use on clip cards) rather than lots of alterations to the base map. Seems to work fine for me.

Once erased, often assisted with a little water, I degrease the film with white spirits and I'm set to go again.

Nothing like a bit of recycling!!!

Show Profile  Alistair Posted: 3 February 2014, 11:22 PM  
Jamie, a few years ago I ran a sprint on a map which used a lot of underground car parks, the intuitive way the mapper (Erik Sundberg) solved the door problems was great. He used a small line where the door was, if the door could be opened it was a fairly bright green. If it was locked it was red. And if it could be opened in one direction it was a double line, green on the side it could be opened from and red on the other side.

The other great fun thing about this event was it was run on 2 levels, the bottom level being the underground (single level) car-parks. He mapped the car-parks in black and white with green/red for the doors, and then printed the outside as a normal sprint map with the same green/red doors on overhead-projector plastic! Then he taped the underground map to the above ground map along one edge of the map. You could thus just flip over the outside map when you went in a door...

This was one of the best sprint events I have ever done, and really complex as Borlänge has 5-6 irregularly shaped underground car-parks with quite a lot of one-way doors. A short leg from one car-park to another involved working out which doors you could get in and out of as well as the best route from the different doors above ground.

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 4 February 2014, 11:04 PM  
That does sound fun. Thanks for the answer. I have used a blue for a training map for this week but will use green and red as you describe in the future.

I have got a couple of planned indoor projects. I think there is some potential there for fun to be had.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 10 February 2014, 11:59 AM  
As always Sprint The Bay was a huge amount of fun. I wish it was not so dependant on eyesight though, and I put up a couple of ideas for discussion. The first is the colour of the course markings. I wonder if the purple is optimised for a certain type of colour-blindness, and for forest orienteering. It doesn't jump off the page in a predominantly urban map for me, and I'm going to do some trials with the white shadow on the numbers. Maybe even trying complete white although every now and then we do get a bit of white on the maps:-) The other is the degree of detail that is becoming common (and of course this echoes talk about standard mapping too). But in standard mapping it is accepted that M/W45+ are entitled to a scale 50% larger than the young people, so why not for sprints?

Show Profile  Dwayne Posted: 11 February 2014, 12:15 PM  
I'm with you Michael. At AOC SummerNav on the Wednesday before STB, we had a sprint course set by Matt Ogden as an extra for anyone who thought they needed some sprint practise. He of course designed the course to be printed at 1:4000 as per the specification, but I blew it up to A4 and used 1:3000 instead. Nobody complained Also used the white framing around the control numbers, which I routinely do now on sprint maps.
See the map on this link http://sdrv.ms/1hOW8tv
Excuse the circle cuts - they were done at 1:4000, then I didn't bother redoing them.

Show Profile  Dwayne Posted: 11 February 2014, 12:18 PM  
Sorry, direct file link is here http://sdrv.ms/1bPcjWE

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 11 February 2014, 1:36 PM  
Thanks Dwayne. An observation, when viewed on my screen the "purple" looks like 100% magenta, whereas the recommendation for achieving purple in digital printing includes some cyan. With (I think) normal colour-sight, I find pure magenta much better, but the spec is optimised for one of the colour-blind variants. We find ourselves "robbing Peter to pay Paul".

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 1 March 2014, 11:49 AM  
At a Norwegian map conference an exercise was set to map a nearby piece or urban terrain. Always good to see different approaches, here there were some issues to do with multiple levels (carparking building). This Attackpoint thread http://www.attackpoint.org/discussionthread.jsp/message_929383 has a discussion in English and links to the Norwegian website where the maps are.

Show Profile  Bryan Posted: 3 March 2014, 10:46 AM  
Pretty much what I expected - the eight mappers only had an hour to map so what we are seeing is a first draft. Most of the maps would be ok to run on apart from the last which I think is too generalised. A really accurate sprint map only comes from lots of different versions and several different people (mapper(s), controller, IOF controller) all going out and making incremental refinements and discussing contentious areas and looking at control sites - something only done for large events. Split levels are a pain - some levels on the Oceania/World cup maps went through 15-20 different versions before everyone was mostly happy.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 16 March 2014, 5:12 PM  
While you're all forced inside by Lusi (or the threat of Lusi) you might like to ponder on the multi-level conundrum, mentioned above. Yes its outside our current limits but I'm curious. Some solutions work only for a limited range of situations.

First the multi-level building which has the same shape on each level. It would seem that multiple numbered plans might work with a symbol like a coloured dot to represent vertical passage. Need three colours or symbols, can go UP here, DOWN, and BOTH. Ramps are harder, but maybe a ramp on level X is shown by a stub of path/road ending in the coloured dot? Who has tried mapping carparking buildings?

Another situation is what I will call the "Hobbit House". This has an undulating ground shape with other levels (eg inside the house) but you possibly transition without obviously climbing/descending. There is no easy way of describing levels here, and I think we may need to say that the main map is the one visible from the sky, to prevent the ambiguities evident in the Norwegian example. I've experimented with a small arrowhead to indicate places where you can transition to the lower level. (The hobbit's front and back doors). Then there's a separate plan of the lower level (ie inside the HH) with the rooms and opposite arrowheads where you can transition back to the main level (the doors). I can see it working for two levels anyway. A challenge is that the underground shape is not the same as the overground shape so relating the two maps is tricky.

Common to all multilevel systems is the course marking problem. Yes we can readily mark circles on the appropriate level, but joining lines???

Just a geekquest, but I've got actual places in mind for each of these:-))


Show Profile  Michael Posted: 16 March 2014, 5:45 PM  
A more "here and now" question is the depiction of "down" on sprint maps with vertical walls. I think we're all using 521.1 as its thinner than 201 impassable cliff. But the main thing is that we don't use tags which of course would make the cliff impossibly thick. So what tells you "down"? The occasional slope tag somewhere else? The occasional stream? Not usually found on a school campus. The way the spec is written I can't even tell whether a "wall" actually has an up and a down side, or is a two-sided thing.


1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65  


Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions maptalk.co.nz