Forum   |   Links    


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   66   67   68   69   70  


Show Profile  Jason Posted: 30 June 2009, 2:10 PM  
I get the same problem that you describe: the second instance of OCAD freezes. My setup is Windows XP SP3 and OCAD 9.4.0 Std.
But I have no problem opening multiple maps within the one instance of OCAD.

Show Profile  Selwyn Posted: 15 July 2009, 1:14 PM  
I use Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I did spend up large with over $800 on a CAD style video card to speed up the constant redrawing of big background map files.
Have had no major problems with running multiple map windows, both within OCAD10, and with OCAD9 and OCAD10 open at the same time.
There have been some crashes, but I think they relate to me having the same 250 MB background orthophotos open in more than one window and more specifically when this occurs with both OCAD9 and OCAD10 open.

Show Profile  The Map Guy Posted: 16 July 2009, 5:22 AM  
I have successfully opened the same OCD map file simultaneously in both OCAD 8 and 9. The file is fairly large and my hard drive is virtually full (get low disk messages). I am using Windows XP Home Edition with SP3. I don't see any any problems and can zoom in and out OK. I can also do editing on both files - not that you'd ever do that.

But I'm using OCAD8Pro and OCAD9Pro. Latest versions (8.13, 9.7.1)and the original OCD file was optimised prior to opening.

I suspect there could be problems if extensive editing was done to a file and it wasn't optimised.

I'll give it a go with OCAD10 and OCAD9 when I get a chance but again I'm using the Pro. version for OCAD10.

Selwyn: What size are your OCAD maps that you need to spend megabucks on upgrading? My biggest OCD file is slightly over 10MB which is basically of mountainous terrain topo map. Map size is slightly bigger than A1 in size - over 1200 sq km (1:50,000 scale). I am coping OK with a computer which is now 7 years old with only 512MB RAM. Would love more RAM but the computer is too old (obsolete) to add more. I will admit instant redrawing is neat, but a few seconds isn't too bad - really only noticeable when you want to see the entire map.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 16 July 2009, 7:04 AM  
Thanks for the responses. About all I can conclude is that (a) I'm not the only one, and (b) everyone's computer is slightly different. For the record my problem seems to be independant of file size, as I regularly optimise, my biggest file is 5Mb in 2 Gb of RAM. Maybe its to do with what else is running at the time - these days all sorts of things happen in the background. Since Vista, I haven't been able to use the pencil tool in the icon editor - but OCAD can't reproduce the problem.

Show Profile  The Map Guy Posted: 16 July 2009, 8:58 AM  
With my computer running with Vista Business I can have OCAD8, OCAD9 and OCAD10 all running simultaneously. All are Pro versions.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 4 August 2009, 4:33 PM  
I'm not really sure what our average hours of fieldwork per sq km is in this country, I think on a really easy map it's probably 30hrs, and just roughly I think the toughest maps are around the 100hrs per sq km (like b-hills and some parts of white lightning from memory) so I nearly fell off my chair when I spotted some mapping info at the 2009 Croatian Championships in Kaast terrain where the average map requires around 30 days per sq km!
I thought I rush through fieldwork a little as I always keep the club budget in mind. Next time I'll take my bbq.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 5 August 2009, 1:48 AM  
I used to record speeds of 15-50hrs/ (with a reasonable basemap). Plus 40-60% drawing. But as the easy areas close to population get used up, there's a demand for working with poor, or no, basemap. For coastal sand-dunes with that awkward fringe between forest and open and no basemap, I've recorded 200hrs/ The drawing goes up too as you have to do two or three passes, so still around 50%. I gather some of the Europeans find it hard to get photogrammetry; maybe Croatia.

Show Profile  Selwyn Posted: 14 August 2009, 8:48 AM  
Haven't looked at Maptalk for a couple of months. In reply to The Map Guy 16th July:
My map files are around 8 MB, but that isn't the issue. It's the background maps of 250 MB that take time to load and refresh. Sometimes have up to 4 such photos files or contour file open at once.

Show Profile  The Map Guy Posted: 14 August 2009, 12:13 PM  
I'm sure there is an easier way Selwyn. However, you seem to have a solution that works for you.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 24 August 2009, 12:14 PM  
Does anyone have any experience with smoothing lines? I've got LIDAR contours from a local body, and there are more points than I think are necessary, and the file size is rather large (10's of Mb). They are destined for a topo-style map rather than a basemap, ie I want to use them largely "as is" rather than as a basis for fieldwork.

I would like to simplify the lines by dropping points that don't contribute much to the shape. There's a "smooth" function in OCAD that appears to reduce points by a certain amount, and if you keep using it the line gets simpler and simpler (and further from the original). It doesn't appear to stop when there's a given amount of difference. Anyone got any tips for using this? Or know the maths behind it?

There also appears to be software out there for "simplifying polylines" in shapefiles and DXF files. Any experience with these?

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 2 September 2009, 6:51 AM  
As NZ adopts a new coordinate system for its topo maps (NZTM) this page from the LINZ website might be handy:

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 6 September 2009, 1:39 AM  
I asked OCAD about the smoothing. It uses the Douglas Peucker algorithm, which is fairly straightforward - successively testing points to see whether removal would move the line by more than x. I had to ask a second time to see what x was for the three different levels of smoothing. I don't understand why there are two sets of figures, but it gives us some idea:

"The tolerance to keep a point in a line or remove it is
- Level 0: 0.01mm
- Level 1: 0.0175mm
- Level 2: 0.02mm
The line can move
- Level 0: 0 mm
- Level 1: 0.02mm
- Level 2: 0.04mm"

0.04mm at 1:15,000 is 0.6m, which would seem to be insignificant, although as we are concerned with shape rather than actual position there might be more to it than that. Guess we'll just have to do some trials and eyeball the new vs the old.

BTW my interest follows use of the "to curve" function some years ago. I initially thought this made nicer looking contours out of polylines, but later I discovered some oddities and have not touched it since. Problem is that you are probably doing heaps at once and you can't inspect the results in detail. Maybe I used too high a smoothing level.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 23 September 2009, 4:49 AM  
Here's a website dedicated to the new coordinate system for NZ topo maps. I think it's more useful than the one above, with a good range of further links.

Sing out if you want to discuss the application to orienteering mapping.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 2 October 2009, 3:15 AM  
OCAD released update 10.1.1 yesterday. As it happens I was chasing a problem with GPX export, which is now fixed. GPX is the standard GPS interchange format and enables transfer to GPS's.

I almost hesitate to mention this, because exporting control locations to a GPS for setout purposes is sure as hell going to cause problems where maps are not geo-referenced properly. BUT geo-referencing maps is the next significant step in o-mapping technology, comparable to the introduction of OCAD itself. There's absolutely no excuse for not geo-referencing new maps, and we should be progressively referencing existing maps as a maintenance aid.

Show Profile  The Map Guy Posted: 2 October 2009, 4:40 PM  
I entirely agree with you Michael. A GPS is extremely useful for adding tracks, clearings, point features, vegetation boundaries etc which do not show up in aerial photographs or photogrammetry. But it doesn't work too well if the map isn't geo-referenced.

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   66   67   68   69   70  

Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions