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: 28 October 2014, 2:53 AM  
Hi Mike, the base contours were from Lidar

Show Profile  MikeB Posted: 28 October 2014, 3:52 AM  
Off the GIS site or were they more specific from the council. The GIS off the their website are generally more smoothed and would hard work on that terrain, I would imagine.

Great to have a new physically challenging area.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 4:04 AM  
Will try to answer your questions Mike.. Martin supplied the ocad generated Lidar at 5m. It was fairly good at showing wiggles both in the farmland and in the native, however it was still a challenge to sort out right from wrong and give them better shape. The native bush was worse but would be significantly better than photogrammetry would have been in the dense canopy. You can see a little of the lidar on the section with 'Not Mapped' printed on. At least these contours were generally correct. Having Geo photos to overlay can be a great help also. If these are high res then it's fantastic.
Currently working on a very complex map containing some Karst Limestone terrain where there was no lidar available. Stewart has done a great job with photogrammetry but it is still pretty hard work making it accurate and then adding stuff. Lidar/photos would probably have been much easier. This is partially/possibly because Stewarts base aerials were flown at a higher 25000ft. Sometimes at lower altitudes his work is perfect.
I have to say some of the terrain the current project is really fantastic - book a date in for next years Nationals NOW everybody!

I hope everyone coped with mentally Kawakawa's slopes. I was very nervous about people experience, only knowing the were interesting bits of the map that would add some spice here and there. The block of mixed native and teatree was a huge mission, at first I didn't want to do it but persevered. It required painstaking work to make it usable, and the photos on this part were very poor.
Hope everyone is ok now it's over. There are some pines that weren't used which are quite nice for next time?
Looking at the maps online it seems like the printing was very fuzzy, seems such as shame if so. Is it also something to do with printing on waterproof paper?
I think we should have some sort of log where map printing info on settings and results could be logged for future reference. Personally I'm not a huge fan of waterproof paper and would rather use proper 'white' combined with a good thicker plastic bag. I can't imagine it was the paper that was the cause of the fuzz though, if that was the case.

Someone please stop the rain as unlike Bryan I have had much luck field working in it, unless it's easy and you never have to rub stuff out.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 4:14 AM  
Ps, re Nationals 2015. Is it year of the Paradise Duck by any chance?
If Kawakawa's fame was that someone used it to train for an Everest assault, then let it be known that next years Nationals area is sometime used in training by the SAS.

Show Profile  MikeB Posted: 28 October 2014, 4:59 AM  
I didn't envy you the task while I was out there. Native can be extremely frustrating and can take hours and hours to get it anywhere near right. Throw in the steepness it could be your worst nightmare. The aerial photos on the Alggi site look really good though, they must have been a huge help. The farmland areas looked very clean and crisp when I looked on the website. You can almost see the individual sheep tracks in those really steep gullies.

The printing was discussed briefly at the controllers clinic yesterday. It was felt the paper may have been part of the problem although the Kawakawa Bay map was definitely worse with the colours a lot more faded and fuzzy than the sprint and middle maps and all were printed on waterproof paper. Waterproof is not so bad if it's forest and mainly white. We used offset rather than digital in the World Masters in 2000 on waterproof and it was fine so digital printing could be a large part of the problem as well.

Test prints before can alleviate issues. If you remember that's what we did for the nationals NW held a few of years ago. So the idea of some sort of log with paper quality, colours, printing settings and results is a good one.

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 5:20 AM  
Some of the alggi photos were amazing but I didn't use them for contours that much because they were too detailed and showed stuff that shouldn't be on the map (too small), and out the back the photos were terrible for the vegetation where I needed it most.
Yeah we need to get a better handle on the problems that occasionally occur with printing so they can be eliminated.

Bryan, where did you find your waterproof pencils, and can they be rubbed out?

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 5:32 AM  
Re Post above for parallel objects.. I just made a change to the method to which Michael has correctly identified that you can use the 'Fill/Make Border' symbol to duplicate an object. Who would have known ocad is so wonderful. That eliminates a whole fiddly experience and now is very cool.

Show Profile  Martin Posted: 28 October 2014, 7:00 AM  
Digital printing is a mixed bag and brown is the hardest colour to print accurately as it's a mix of other colours which all need to be lined up.

I think that's where the Kawakawa Bay map suffered; especially when combined with yellow farmland (remembering that Plantation is forest and hence white).

The paper probably doesn't help achieve bright colours.

I've got an IOF tech sheet and have been trying to match the colours (with difficulty) and have been testing some of the settings used across in Australia. For those with NZSS maps of Waiuku Forest it would be interesting to know your thoughts on those colours.

A test print on the big printer at work produced looked pretty awesome but that's another story.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 28 October 2014, 8:41 AM  
I'm not sure that a printing log will help as much as a free-form discussion. Usually there is some apparently innocuous change from the regular way of doing things that is the culprit, and almost by definition it won't be one of the standard items in the log. It needs to be drawn out of those involved, a process not unlike pulling teeth. Who prepared the files for Kawakawa and are you reading this forum?

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 10:28 AM  
Its the same thing that happened to the naseby relay map Michael. Did you ever find out the problem?
People need to find out what not to do.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 28 October 2014, 12:02 PM  
We didn't manage to complete the extraction on that occasion Paul. Without seeing the Kawakawa map, a topic of interest could be rasterisation of the pdf. But surely not, after all the discussion we've had.

Show Profile  fraser Posted: 28 October 2014, 1:06 PM  
Ok, thanks for the replies for drawing parallel objects.

The Fill/Create border does nothing to the road in OpenOrienteering and the parallel mode sounds specific to OCAD too. Looks like I am out of like for now but hopefully that will at least help someone else in future. Cheers.

Show Profile  onemanfanclub Posted: 28 October 2014, 1:25 PM  
Can't say I noticed any fuzzyness on the Kawakawa map (maybe my oxygen debt naturally compensated for it) but the greens struck me as a bit odd - the 'walk' green in particular looks not far removed from the OOB olive, whereas to my eye they normally look quite different. Paul, don't worry about scaring people, it was an epic - mostly in a good way.

Show Profile  rob.g Posted: 29 October 2014, 12:20 AM  
I thought the green showed up as grey looking, but worse for me was the patches of white could not be seen on the map. Was a good fun area, though, and reminded me of Pollock and Awhitu, those tough 80's maps we used to run/walk on.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 29 October 2014, 5:37 AM  
This doesn't solve your problem Fraser, but OOM seems to have a couple of ways of putting an object exactly on top of another. There's a duplicate function but unlike OCAD it doesn't displace the duplicate, so you might not notice it has been done:-)) And the fill/border thing (line on line) works for me. Haven't found a way of doing the move parallel though.

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