Messages

1

Feature Requests / Track averaging

« on: August 24, 2007, 05:01:08 PM »

Greetings:

One of the things I seem to do a LOT with TF is average tracks. TF can approximate this with the Make Network (MN) tool, but this approach has some drawbacks: using MN requires one to split all tracks into averagable sections in separate files, and disable all but the sections to be averaged; and MN (irrevocably?) marks the result as a network.

What I suggest is something akin to the Track Merge ™ tool, except that it would average multiple tracks instead of catenate them. Operation would be: select the tool/mode, click on a track, shift-click on additional tracks, and use a right click menu item to save the average (or remove last, etc.). As with the TM tool, selection would not cross track breaks (so each bit to be merged would not have to be saved to a separate file).

Thanks for continuing to develop this great program.

2

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Re-Center On This Point

« on: April 26, 2005, 07:52:08 PM »

I think you do not appreciate just how slow my computer is. '>

Dragging a point to the center can be quite painful as I drag, wait, drag, wait, drag--oops, too far!, drag, wait . . . you get the idea. Redraws with scaled tiles can take a few seconds each on this pig. Something which allows me to center on a point in a single redraw would be a big win. These slow redraws also make the smooth scrolling TF does when using the arrow keys quite painful (that's one of the reasons I was asking for a way to set a precise zoom; a zoom of 1.0 redraws much faster than one of 1.x).

700 Mhz Celeron, BTW, with 384 MB RAM, and onboard Intel Extreme! graphics. 3D is kinda tricky, too, as map areas larger than a certain size won't texture.

3

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Track Interpolation and Smoothing

« on: April 26, 2005, 07:16:08 PM »

A-ha! I knew I'd seen that somewhere! For some reason, when the cursor is the hand, I just don't think of right-clicking (status bar prompt or no).

Maybe this could be added as a button on the trackpoints tab of the file properties dialog?

[Quote]

4

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Zoom and Tileset Suggestions

« on: April 26, 2005, 07:10:26 PM »

Quote (Alan @ April 24 2005,4:41)

First, note that the "Tile Sets" tab in the options dialog allows you to turn off tilesets, so you only get the ones you want. [...] For limited uses, it's a good idea, but that's why we provided the list of checkboxes in the options dialog.

True, but it's a hassle to keep changing those settings. What I was suggesting was basically a way to do this more efficiently. The Preferences dialog records what the default behavior should be, while this new functionality controls specific exceptional cases (e.g., "TF wants to use Aerial 4M for this, but I'd like to see it using Aerial 1M").

Quote (Alan @ April 24 2005,4:41)

In general it is not a good idea to unlink the zoom and tileset.  Consider what happens if one is zoomed out far enough to see an entire state.  What happens if the user wants to see Aerial 1M at this level?  Each tile is smaller than one pixel at this view.

But TF won't allow that anyway: it stops drawing tiles when the scaling gets too far out of whack (under the control of that Preferences slider). So I guess I don't see the harm in allowing it. If the user chooses a bad combination, they get a bad map. I don't see novice users using this capability, anyway.

Quote (Alan @ April 24 2005,4:41)

I'm not sure about the history of views.  Do you know of any other mapping program that provides this functionality.  I don't think your web browser saved the state of the scrolllbars such that you can press back/forward to move back and forth through different "view" of the page.  It's an interesting idea.  Right now, the only way to really save your place is to create a GPX file with a waypoint or something there.

That idea is straight from my fevered brain. Mozilla and Internet Explorer both try to save the scrollbar state when following links (but, obviously, not when just scrolling around), though they both often get it slightly wrong due to HTML rendering issues. In this case, TF has an advantage, as the exact center, zoom, and tileset are known.

I'd be happy to work up a step-by-step if an example would help illustrate the idea.

5

Archived Support / Access Violation-Make Network

« on: April 26, 2005, 06:21:42 PM »

Yeah, I've had this problem off and on as long as I remember. Same spartan log message as you get. I find that restarting Windows (not just TF, the whole computer) sometimes helps, but not always. Some tracks just won't convert. I'll send one in.

[Quote]

6

Archived Support / missing DEM files

« on: April 26, 2005, 06:08:58 PM »

Quote (Tom_Perry @ April 24 2005,10:22)

In Climbing Analysis, I get the following message:  WARNING: Track covers missing DEM files!

I usually get this message when I try to do the climbing analysis on a track which is not checked for display. Is the track displayed?

7

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Network Splitting and Scattering

« on: April 23, 2005, 11:33:48 PM »

The network analysis tool often generates networks where the track segments do not always meet at endpoints (e.g., one segment "T"s into the middle of another). This makes constructing composite tracks with the profile tool quite difficult: one must first identify all such intersections by hand, break them with the cut tool, and fix the ends so that they are in proximity again. It would be nice if TF could automate this process, so that all segments are manifold.

As an adjunct to this, it would be nice if TF could automatically split segments into separate files. This would make it easier to copy parts of one network into another. One simple approach would be to save each segment in a file named according to the source file and that segment's terminal waypoints.

8

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Track Interpolation and Smoothing

« on: April 23, 2005, 11:23:56 PM »

I thought that these used to be on the "to do" list, but I don't see them anymore, and I can't find them in TF.

First, my crappy Magellan unit has a really small tracklog, which means that I often get tracks with fewer points than I would like. Alternately, I get lazy when drawing tracks, and space points widely when the track is straight. What I would like is for TF to insert points into such tracks to where no two adjacent points are more than a given distance apart. This would allow for more effective application of DEM data to the track, as well as providing a wealth of points to match against maps.

Second, some of my drawn tracks have the opposite problem--too many points! When dragging the cursor with the drawing tool, one can get a truly impressive number of points. It would be nice if TF could smooth these tracks down to a given mean inter-point distance.

A single tool could probably accomplish both tasks, with the user defining minimum and maximum inter-point distances. Several different algorithms could be used, with varying degrees of fidelity to the original track.

9

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Re-Center On This Point

« on: April 23, 2005, 11:08:20 PM »

I thought that there was a way to do this, but I can't find it now. What I would like is to be able to quickly move a point to the center of the window. For example, double clicking while using the "hand" tool would move the clicked point dead center in the display.

10

Archived - Feedback and Comments / 3D Mode Rotation Controls

« on: April 23, 2005, 11:06:10 PM »

It would be nice if the arrow keys worked as axial rotations in 3D mode. Using the mouse I always manage to get the map cocked off to the side pretty quickly because my cursor is not exactly centered on the screen, or drifts to the side as I drag it. The arrow keys would be much more precise.

The UP and DOWN arrows would rotate the image about the horizontal centerline of the display; the LEFT and RIGHT arrows would rotate the image about the vertical centerline. I would suggest having the plain arrow keys be macro adjustments (say, 10 degrees per press by default), and SHIFT+arrow be micro adjustments (1 degree per press).

11

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Zoom and Tileset Suggestions

« on: April 23, 2005, 10:46:59 PM »

I have a few suggestions regarding the handling of tileset and zoom factor in the TF interface. Since these suggestions may not make sense on their own, I'll start by describing the situations which prompted them.

First, there are times when I wish I could manually control which tileset is being displayed, independent of the current zoom level. For example, my preferences are set so that a zoom of 8.88 maps to Topo 16M, but for this particular map I'd rather use Topo 4M. You can sometimes force TF to do this by messing with the preferences, but not always.

Second, I often wish I had a way to switch to an exact zoom level. Relative zoom is nice, but I find myself wanting to reset the zoom to a specific value every so often (most commonly, 1.0). The tileset selector provides a partial solution, but only if you are changing tilesets. If I'm using Aerial 4M, and want to jump to 1.0 zoom, I can simply select Aerial 1M. The tileset is changed, and the zoom set to 1.0. But there's no easy way to set the zoom to 4.0 when using Aerial 4M; selecting Aerial 4M does nothing as that is already the current tileset. Instead, I have to change tilesets twice: away from Aerial 4M, and then back again. This is frustrating, especially on an old computer like mine, which is painfully slow at scrolling scaled maps.

Finally, a related problem shows up when editing tracks. I'm examining the map, and see something which bears closer inspection. I zoom way in, and disentangle some trackpoints. But when I'm done, there's no easy way to get back to the view I just left.

The first two of these are easy to fix--at least from a user interface perspective. One normally wants the tileset to be linked to the zoom level, but not always. One could add a checkbox between the zoom level and tileset droplist which controls this linkage. When checked, TF acts as it does now; when cleared, zoom and tileset act independently. To easily control the precise zoom factor, one could make the zoom display control a combobox; the droplist would contain common zooms (0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, etc.), and the user could type in an exact zoom level.

The last item is slightly harder: it implies a history of views, with the ability to move back and forth between them. The metaphor used by web browsers may be of use here. One has the current, live view, and a history of saved views. Buttons allow one to move back and forward through this list, and to push a new saved view. Moving or zooming makes the current view the live view, and discards any "forward" views from there. One could even get fancy and allow combinations like holding the SHIFT key while zooming with the magnifying glass to automatically save the view before zooming.

I know this was a pretty long post, but I think these minor interface changes would improve the ergonomics of the interface greatly.

[Quote]

12

Archived - Feedback and Comments / New Combo Options

« on: April 23, 2005, 09:45:40 PM »

Quote (jmstacey @ April 23 2005,3:27)

With the semi-recent additions of the LandSat and Urban tilesets, some way to toggle which aerials to use instead of the original aerials would be an excellent addition.

T: Toggle between Topo and Aerial.
A: Cycle through Topo, Combo, and Aerial.
C: Switch to Urban ("Color").
L: Switch to Landsat.

For some reason, "A" no longer works once one is in Landsat mode. "C" and "T" still work fine, though and can be used as a workaround. There seems to be no way to switch straight to aerial mode, though. One must use either "T" or "A" and keep mashing until the correct tileset is chosen.

To my knowledge, there are no hot keys for selecting resolution, nor hotkeys for setting zoom. Page Up and Page Down zoom in or out relative to the current zoom, but that's not the same thing.

[Quote]

13

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Managing Map .dat files

« on: April 02, 2005, 09:47:59 AM »

Quote (jmstacey @ Mar. 28 2005,1:44)

For anyone else who might be creating a script, I've figured out the tileset to number mapping sytem (tileset number), everything else seems pretty self explanatory.

I don't see tileset 3 listed. Tilesets 0-2 are increasing by a factor of four each time (so, if 2 is 64M, then 3 = 64M * 4 = 256M), and Topo 256M is the only one in the interface not listed here (excepting the Combo items, which probably don't have their own tileset numbers).

So is tileset 3 Topo 256M?

14

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Path handling suggestions

« on: March 30, 2005, 09:33:07 AM »

I have a couple of suggestions on how to improve path handling under TF:

1. Add a preference item indicating that TF should remember the most recent working directory between sessions.

2. Add a file selection dialog button to the Network Analysis dialog. Currently, one must use a separate program to see which files already exist, and one cannot change the directory in which they are stored.

If these have already been suggested, my apologies.

  -- Mark

[Quote]

15

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Managing Map .dat files

« on: March 22, 2005, 09:17:15 AM »

Quote (Krein @ Mar. 17 2005,9:10)

We'd be happy to release the spec for others to write a program.  Sure. Are you a programmer that might be interested in writing it?

I'm a programmer, and I might well be interested--especially if we can work out a way to easily integrate the result back into TF while protecting your proprietary assets. I'd need to know more about your development environment (e.g., VS 6, required libs, etc.).

16

Archived - Feedback and Comments / breaking up a 'mega-trak'

« on: March 14, 2005, 08:53:13 PM »

IIRC, better track editing is one of those things that is always on the wish list, but never at the top. Partly because you can already do all of this, if sometimes in obscure or painful ways.

If the tracks from the .mps file overlap, the way to start is to run the Network Analysis tool on them. After fiddling with the parameters for a bit, you should be able to simplify all the overlapped sections (be aware, though, that this can seriously mess with altitude information if your GPS jumps around).

Once the duplicates are gone, you can start chunking up the network with the cut tool. Simply cut the track at each junction, until you have a set of segments which intersect only at their endpoints.

Now for the magic step: use the profile tool. Eh? The profile tool? Yep. Turns out that the profile tool is also the track merge tool. Shift-select all the chunks needed for a single trail (using the right-click menu as needed to reverse segments). When the trail is complete, right click again and save it out as a new GPX file. Revert the display to just the chunked up trail, and repeat the process for the next track.

It would definitely be nice if this were easier, but it can be done with the program as it stands.

Hope this helps.

  -- Mark

[Quote]

17

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Elevation gain while drawing

« on: March 14, 2005, 07:31:28 PM »

Quote (Krein @ Mar. 01 2005,9:17)

Yep, you can do it now in 2.5, but it isn't very obvious unfortunately.

Maybe you could make this available under the Track Properties dialog as well? That would allow both track points and waypoints to be "snapped" to the DEM data.

Way cool, BTW. This feature's worth the price of admission all by itself.

  -- Mark

[Quote]

18

Archived Support / Drawing errors w/o 3D accelerated graphics?

« on: March 14, 2005, 07:14:15 PM »

Quote (Krein @ Mar. 01 2005,9:24)

The first thing to try is to update your video drivers, even if you don't have 3d accleration.  This might solve it.

Apparently that was the problem on the old system. It took a while to find new drivers for such an ancient graphics card, but once I installed them TF starting acting properly. I'll keep hunting for updated drivers for the newer machine.

One suggestion: if the maximum texture turns out smaller than the texture requested (e.g., req: 2048x1024, max: 1024x1024), it would be nice for TF to just use the maximum size available.

  -- Mark

19

Archived Support / Drawing errors w/o 3D accelerated graphics?

« on: February 25, 2005, 06:40:48 PM »

I just grabbed 2.5 and installed it. I almost immediately went for the 3D mode (since I had never gotten that to work on my own with previous versions), and almost immediately ran into trouble.

Unfortunately, I don't have the exact message in front of me, but the gist is: "Cannot create texture; Needed Size: 2048x1024, Maximum Size: 1024x1024." This message is followed by a warning telling me that I don't have 3D accelerated graphics (which indeed I don't), and then a grayscale surface map. Disappointing, but not completely unexpected.

Then, after scrolling around a bit, salivating, TF suddenly locked up. No reponse from anything. I let it sit for a few minutes (since rendering the GL scene can take a minute or two on my machine), but TF never came back. I finally killed it with Task Manager (Win 2000, up-to-date). Again, TF does this on a somewhat regular basis anyway, so I wasn't too worried.

Unfortunately, when I reloaded, TF was not happy. The window comes up, and all the controls draw, but the map area never does. It simply retains the image of whatever was drawn there most recently (desktop, tool-tips, menus, etc.--just not the map). The program responds normally, and acts like it thinks its drawing (pauses in the same way for rendering), but nothing ever actually gets drawn. Toggling between the various 2D/3D modes and tilesets doesn't seem to help--in fact, nothing seems to help.

I have recreated part of this second problem on another machine: late-model P4 with 3D acceleration and gobs of memory. The moment I try to toggle back to 2D mode, the drawing area stops redrawing (and just collects garbage). On this machine, though, hitting the 3D button again will bring up a new 3D view, and toggling the state of the track list twice will finally cause it to show 2D plots again.

Any ideas? Also, is 3D acceleration basically required for TF to operate at this point (like with Roxio)?

Thanks. From what little I saw, the new version looks nice.

  -- Mark

[Quote]

20

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Suggestion: Map Tile Status & Auto Download

« on: September 01, 2004, 04:28:59 PM »

Quote (Krein @ Aug. 30 2004,8:57)

You can do batch downloads of tiles using the 'load maps tool' (on the toolbar).  Just draw a box, go to sleep, and you'll have your tiles.  Turn off whatever tilesets you don't want in Preferences->Tilesets.

Ah, yes. Just like it describes in the status bar when I select it.

Sigh.

I always poke around the main and context menus for options; I rarely think to look at the status bar for instructions. I should, but I don't.

  -- Mark

[Quote]

21

Archived Support / Automation API?

« on: September 01, 2004, 04:18:58 PM »

Quote (Krein @ Aug. 31 2004,7:40)

There is a way to create "virtual tracks" using a network.  Just use the profile/merge tool.  Select each segment of the network in order, and be sure to reverse any (using the "v" key or right clicking) that match up backwards.  Right click when you are done and do "save as.." to a GPX file.

Sure enough, it works as you describe.

This is getting embarassing. I very obviously need to reread the manual. '>

Quote (Krein @ Aug. 31 2004,7:40)

However, I have used the network code for a dozen different projects (some mtb race courses) with great success.  It does take some tweaking and certainly helps to understand the algorithm.

I had a sneaking suspicion that I was missing something--after all, I couldn't be the first person wanting to do this. I'll give it another whack. I think that it's pretty obvious that most of the tools were there; I just didn't know it. I will send you some data, though, so you can see what I've been working with. I'll also send along my final result, so you can see the mess I made. '>

Let me see if I have it straight, now. I load up my data, and run a moderate-contraction, low-reduction network construction on it to find the major pieces. Where the network construction fails to average what I want averaged, break and save the appropriate segments to new tracks (selection of input for network construction is only at the track level, right?). For each set of tracks to be averaged, select only those tracks, and run a network construction on them with whatever contraction is necessary to get a clean merge; discard the waypoints. Finally, select all the tracks, and merge them into a single network, with lowest contraction and reduction. Am I way off base?

Quote (Krein @ Aug. 31 2004,7:40)

As it stands, the network feature takes both quite a bit of knowledge and patience.  I hope to remedy this in the future.

Considering the tools that are available, not much more basic functionality is needed--the ergonomics just need to be addressed. For example, splitting and combining tracks could be made easier (it looks like one currently has to go through the profile dialog to do combining, which was not a place I thought to look for it). Also, it would also be nice to have a way to get at the pieces of the network construction algorithm without having to run the whole thing (e.g., average these tracks, simplify this track, split these tracks where they intersect, combine these tracks into a network, etc.). The rest is just (somehow) making it more obvious that the functionality is available, to users who don't remember what they read in the manual.

  -- Mark

22

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Elevation Change on Track Profile?

« on: September 01, 2004, 03:03:02 PM »

A "gradient" mode would be quite nice, yes. I would point out the obvious, though, that gradients can be both positive and negative when the track is viewed directionally. This can be handled nicely by having two coloring modes: one where positive and negative are colored differently, and one where they are colored the same. The same track can then be viewed in terms of directional grade, or in terms of absolute grade.

As for colors used, I would like to be able to change them. Most of the colors used right now in the elevation coloring show up pretty well, but the white used at the highest elevations often fades into the background on my monitor. It'd be nice to define my own rainbow, to match my usage better. Of course, with my recent record on asking for features already present, this is probably already possible. :roll:

Smoothing in raw elevation mode could be useful to eliminate bogus points. Maybe the algorithm used in your Climbing Analysis could be adapted. So long as we can turn it off...

Finally, it would be nice to be able to specify elevation limits and defaults. All recorded elevations get clipped to the low and high limits. All unknown elevations get defaulted to either a fixed value, or to the elevation as pulled from available DEM data (IIRC, you can insert the DEM elevations into the track already, so this is just a non-destructive version of the same idea). Similarly, an option to ignore the recorded elevation, and use only the DEM data could be useful.

   -- Mark

23

Archived Support / Automation API?

« on: August 31, 2004, 04:53:22 PM »

Several things, though the foremost desire involved some nutty ideas I have about how better to edit track information. While it is certainly possible to edit tracks with the current interface, it is not terribly efficient, and can be quite hard to control. Example: I was trying to use TF to make the map of the new race course for the Socorro Fat Tire Fiesta. I am not a strong enough rider to ride the whole thing at once, so I did it in pieces. I then tried to use TF's Make Network feature to join them all up.

That didn't work out so well.

I had three basic problems: First, while you can split a track segment into two segments (I think), there doesn't appear to be any way to join two segments into one, or combine segments from different tracks.

Second, there is no control over which segments TF tries to average, or how it averages them (yes, there are the global controls, but those do not give the level of control necessary for accurate maps). This leads to duplicate segments in some locations, while other segments get averaged to an incorrect location (when compared to the aerial photos, e.g.). This isn't a bug per se (TF didn't misbehave), it just didn't know what the "right" answer was, and I couldn't tell it.

Finally, and more fundamentally, track segment networks are not tracks. If the track is manifold (a simple loop), then they are equivalent. Any sort of complicated route, though, involves jumping between segments, and/or duplicated sections of the trail (often in different directions). Tracks imply  a certain sequentiality; this is not present in networks. No GPS is going to be able to handle a complicated network "track" properly, as it doesn't match the GPS' expectations of what tracks are. Try "backtracking" a network to see what I mean.

Put another way (because I really do think that this is an important point): You can't ride a network. You CAN ride a track involving pieces of the network strung together in a certain order. But, AFAICT, there is no way to create a track from a network under TF. So networks look great when rendered, but that's about all you can do with them; the length, elevation profile, and even direction of travel are all suspect, because the sequentiality is broken.

So, what does this have to do with automation? Simple: I was going to write a track network editor, which would drive TF for display. Kind of a testbed to see what works and what doesn't when editing tracks. Once I had something that worked, I was going to present it to you, to see if you would include something similar in TF.

I can give you a better write-up of my ideas as they stand, if you want. You're more likely to get them in a finished form than I am. '>

  -- Mark

[Quote]

24

Archived Support / No Live Tracking Log?

« on: August 31, 2004, 03:54:26 PM »

Quote (Krein @ Aug. 30 2004,8:59)

It's definitely high on the list.

Is this list available anywhere, so we don't bug you with problems/features you already know about?

  -- Mark

25

Archived Support / Remote Desktop and TF

« on: August 31, 2004, 03:52:51 PM »

TF doesn't appear to redraw correctly when using it via a Winders XP Remote Desktop connection. In particular, the main window does not get redrawn reliably. For example, after selecting an area with the load maps tool, the download dialog leaves an afterimage. Similarly, trying to draw a new selection leaves an afterimage of the original selection.

Forcing a redraw makes it all purty again, of course. Also, FWIW, the map under the cursor gets redrawn properly, so one can "paint" the afterimage away if one is sufficiently bored.

This is more FYI than a real problem for me, BTW.

  -- Mark

26

Archived Support / Automation API?

« on: August 30, 2004, 07:54:33 PM »

Does TF have any sort of automation API? OLE Automation, custom COM, whatever?

  -- Mark

27

Archived Support / No Live Tracking Log?

« on: August 30, 2004, 07:53:06 PM »

So, there I am, all happy that I can finally use TF's live tracking feature with my Magellan GPS, and then I can't figure out how to save the live track to a GPX file!

My GPS can only store 2000 trackpoints; when taking trackpoints at 0.01 mi (the only way to get a half-decent-resolution trace on that bloody thing), this doesn't get you far. I had hoped (nay, prayed) that I could use TF's live tracking feature as a way around this limitation.

Am I just being dense, or can TF really not do this?

  -- Mark

28

Archived - Feedback and Comments / Suggestion: Map Tile Status & Auto Download

« on: August 30, 2004, 07:42:46 PM »

I recently used the live tracking feature of TF for some navigating on old mining roads. While it worked (now that 2.1 finally supports my POS Magellan GPS), I ran into a problem. I had tried the pan-around-to-cache-all-the-tiles approach to seeding my cache, but I apparently missed some crucial tiles. Zooming in or out didn't help, since I hadn't cached those tiles at all.

My suggestion has two parts: First, it would be nice if one could see easily what tiles are cached. Possibly overlaying the target grid onto a larger grid's images, so one has some context about what tiles are missing (e.g., show the 4M tiles, with shading showing the status of the 1M tiles).

Second, it would be *really* nice if TF allowed batch downloading of multiple resolutions and styles for a given area. That is, given this area, download all 1M, 4M, 16M, and 64M topos and aerials. Obviously, this could be abused pretty badly, but perhaps limits could be built in?

  -- Mark

29

Archived Support / Trouble getting DEM to work...

« on: August 28, 2004, 03:07:30 PM »

Some more info. My demIndex.dat file contains the following:

2
C:\Program Files\TopoFusion\catmtn.dem
catmtn.dem
1
12
488144
3.55431e+006
488160
3.56817e+006
499935
3.56816e+006
499935
3.5543e+006
C:\Program Files\TopoFusion\socorro-south.dem
socorro-south.dem
0
0
166018
0
166018
0
166018
0
166018
0

Obviously the "socorro-south" entry is bogus, but I'm not sure why. I can send the DEM file to anyone who wants to look at it.

 Â -- Mark

30

Archived Support / Trouble getting DEM to work...

« on: August 28, 2004, 01:16:27 PM »

I recently upgraded to 2.1, and decided that it was time to try the whole 3D thing again. I am promoting a mountain bike event here in Socorro, NM, and I would very much like to use TF to make my trail maps.

I can't seem to get the 3D view to work.

I tried option #1 from the 3d.php page. I zoomed to the area in question, saved a NED GeoTIFF file, used 3DEM to convert it to an ASCII DEM file (~6 MB), and placed that file in my DEM directory (C:\Program Files\TopoFusion). I load up my track, zoom it to fit, and hit the 3D button.

I get a beautifully rendered, but completely flat map. '>

Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

 Â -- Mark