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  Martin Posted: 19 March 2007, 11:31 AM  
likewise there are some good sprint issues with the botanical gardens map

Show Profile  addison Posted: 19 March 2007, 1:05 PM  
Nice dig Martin.

Show Profile  Selwyn Posted: 19 March 2007, 4:31 PM  
Paul and Michael and etc, I've enjoyed reading your mapping comments. White Lightning was one of the poorest maps I have encountered for legibility. The gap between brown features was much too small and the appearance was very fudged. I examined the map at home under bright light using a 8x magnifier and still struggled to read knoll features. Orienteering in the field was a bit of guesswork even using a new pair of O glasses from the MapShop. (guesswork can't be too bad as I had one my better runs for a long time!)
One of the problems we face with legibility relates to using laser printers. The older maps Paul refers to ("maps were a work of art") were printed very precisely and clearly using off-set process. I remember changing pens to 0.13 where the brown features became close together, and also holding the drawing pen very gently to get a finer line. The orienteers had no problems reading the map. Try getting a strong (8 times) magnifying glass onto a old off-set map and comparing it to a new laser printed map. The laser map is just a series of nebulous dots.
My experience so far with city park maps and especially maps drawn to IOF Sprint standards is that they take many times longer to draw than a forest map. Very much appreciated Svens refrence last year to it made my approch to sprint maps somewhat more rational.
Is anyone else interested in the Aussie mapping workshop in June? Grahan Teahan says he is.
I would be happy to join others on a mapping discussion venture, in the field or in the armchair. I'm away during the weekend after Easter (Ruapehu offers more interest) but I'm free during the week.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 20 March 2007, 3:40 AM  
Hi Selwyn ! Watch out for stray lahars. Finally someone else has identified with precisely with my W/L knoll legibility issue. I was beginning to think I was all alone with my imaginary thoughts. Without being too repetitive I also think the specification sizes of some of the other features adds to the problem. To me the Wounded Knee map using the old specs is far far easier to read!
Those b---dy fuzzy lines. They seem to more fuzzy than most, maybe some printers are better than others.
I am very interested in the Aussie workshop, especially if we head down the GPS direction in the future. But I'll probably have to give it a miss. I can't think why but the rest of my family would rather go to Fiji and I can't afford both. It would be awesome if you guys go and upon returning produce a detailed report for those who can't.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 20 March 2007, 8:25 AM  
The symbol sizes have been arrived at by experts after consideration of visual acuity. And assuming offset printing. We choose to use laser printing because of the economics of short print runs. As Selwyn points out laser printing is not as good as offset because under a microscope it is "dotty". Obviously there is variation between printers, and improvement over time, but it is still frowned on for top international events. In these circumstances I don't believe we should be reducing symbol sizes - but we do have to use all our skills to maintain spacing between symbols.

This message was edited by Michael on 20 March 2007, 4:41 PM

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 21 March 2007, 3:05 AM  
Ouch !
Yes we do have digital printing problems to deal with, that is why there has been a lot of friendly discussions re the issues.

If these so called very clever experts you speak of are so enlightened then how come there is debate surrounding the ISOM2000 specs in many countries around the world?
Is it remotely possible that amoung us, having excelled at various feilds from cartography to graphic design, some of us may have some visual acuity of our own?

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 25 March 2007, 9:46 AM  
It appears that a number of mappers are available during the week of the Aftermatch Carnival. Michael, Selwyn, Tricia and Wayne seem keen on meeting at White Lightening Mid week on the thursday. I should also be able to rearrange work commitments around this if this is our only option.
As I have said it will not be difficult to find areas of interest on this map as the photogrammetry was differcult to use, some area's were very vague with subtle cotour changes and others quite complex. It may be of benefit to see some of the base material we had to use. We were also on a very tight schedule and had to rush things a bit, so I'm sure there will be some areas that we will find that could be easily mapped and represented in a different manner. After discussion maybe it would help to pick a tiny area of this and do a fieldworking exercise to see the way others would map them.
There are other area's that I am happy with the results where I had to generalise a fair bit, that would probably be worth looking at, and a couple of spots were I initially generalised a little too much , then remapped after the course setter pointed them out. The result being more accurate but also possibly a little complex on the final map. I still believe that it would add benefit to visit other maps in slightly different terrain produced by different mappers if possible.
If everyone is still keen we could pencil in the date and someone could volunteer to contact others who may not have read the Maptalk forum.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 25 March 2007, 10:45 AM  
Good. Though I'm having to review staying for the week now due to workload. But that's no reason for it not to proceed.

Show Profile  Selwyn Palmer Posted: 27 March 2007, 1:13 AM  
Thanks Paul. How about we aim to meeet at about 1.45 pm at the White Lightning event and meet for a mapping discussion on a piece of terrain that Paul thinks is suitable. Obviously would be useful to know numbers. Paul, if you want some workshop sheets printed, you could email or post something to me before the day.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 28 March 2007, 4:02 PM  
OK that sounds sweet as.

Would all of you guys and gals interested in the mapwalk/discussion at White Lightening, 1:45pm Thurs 12 April please let me know if you can join us. Email me: Include anyone else you have spoken to who wants to come also. Has anyone contacted Jim Lewis or Mike Beveridge?

I'll put my hand up to gather topic info and come up with a stratigic plan to cover as many topics as we can on the day and visit appropriate sites on the map.

So I need each of you to email me your list of subjects or issues you wish to look at or discuss, and what your goal is from attending this informal mapping (fieldworking) workshop.
From your requests I'll try to put together some brief paperwork notes, and map material that we can use so that we have a little structure and so we can make notes as we learn from each other on our quest for more consistant mapping!

Some ideas I can think of...
1. Generalisation: when to, and examples of good/poor generalisation.
2. Vague sand dune terrain: How to/not to map, problem solving.
3. Complex area's: over/under mapped.
4. Poor base map or photogrammetry: swapping ideas for surveying these difficult situations.
5. Different mapping styles: not neccessarily right or wrong, but being on the same page.
6. Vegetation: Greens.
7. Veg boundaries and clearings: what, when and how, in the interests of map clarity.
8. Formlines: not enough/too many.
9. Those b----y depressions and knolls.
10. ISOM 2000 Specs. and digital printing issues and how to convert our previous specification maps. What are our options if the terrain is very complex.
11. What the orienteering public want/dislike on a map.
12. Future mappers: are they born? can we help? Do we have a problem.
13. ??? Maybe bring other maps to discuss problems that arose with them.... Bla bla bla whatever.

Anyway I could probably go on and on, but I want your problems or issues that you would like to try to address so that this workshop is worthwhile and so we all get something out of it, apart from mingling in the woods with fellow enthusiasts and a cold beer afterwards!

Coming along so far then... Me, Carsten, Selwyn, Michael? Tricia and Wayne?
We need more.

Looking forward to hearing from you all.
Anyone happy to be MC on the day, please feel free!

May you run like the wind at the nationals, unless you are in my grade.
Paul Ireland

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 28 March 2007, 4:38 PM  
Have withdrawn from the After Match event. Regret won't be able to attend. Keen to hear feedback. And to see more of these - no doubt I won't be the only one unable to be there - and some issues only crop up on some terrain types.

This message was edited by Michael on 29 March 2007, 12:40 AM

Show Profile  ole codger Posted: 29 March 2007, 10:22 AM  
I've talked to Mike B about the meeting and he appears keen. Tricia will not be there. You have covered the topics pretty well Paul and I think you should chair the meeting.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 10 April 2007, 3:52 AM  
It's very pleasing to have the following mappers confirmed to attend the White Lightening Mapwalk/Workshop so far...
Wayne Aspin, Mike Beveridge, Paul Ireland, Carsten Jorgensen, Selwyn Palmer, John Robinson, and Graham Teahan. I hope you all got you Topic notes ok. Let me know if there is anyone else wishing to join in so I can print off enough workshop sheets for the day.

Show Profile  onemanfanclub Posted: 28 April 2007, 10:17 AM  
This is interesting. Or scary. The same piece of terrain as interpreted by 16 (Czech) mappers. Would we get that much variation throwing the Aspins, Teahans, MJW, Paul Ireland etc on to the same piece of dirt here?

Show Profile  Martin Posted: 28 April 2007, 11:29 AM  
hopefully the maps would be finished

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