Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - sanewcomb

Pages: 1 [2]
51
Beta Testing / Beta 2.1x crashes
« on: January 10, 2005, 10:33:45 PM »
On the whole, I was not panning around that long before it crashed. More than a few minutes. Not sure if it was 30 minutes. I had panned and switched to a different program, and it crashed while getting the tiles in the background.

I was not zooming at the time it crashed, and hadn't zoomed for some time. It was primarily panning across the state of AZ to pick up the tiles. Was not switching modes (topo/aerial) at all.

I resumed the panning after restarting the program and was able to finish AZ. I would guess my use after the crash was perhaps 5 times the use before it crashed. The previous crash was also in a relatively short time after starting the program. In neither case was the map.dat file very big (all the tiles were in one file, < 650MB).

52
Beta Testing / Beta 2.1x crashes
« on: January 10, 2005, 08:32:18 AM »
While I was panning around AZ collecting Landsat tiles, the program abruptly crashed generating one of those error messages asking me to send info to Microsoft. This also happened in one of the 2.15 betas (can't remember which). Will send the topofusion.log file. Doesn't appear to cause any other problems and program reloads ok.

53
Beta Testing / Beta 2.15 rev 2 Landsat 1024M tileset
« on: January 06, 2005, 01:26:11 PM »
Hi Scott,

Nice addition of another tile set. Not terribly useful for planning trips, but I still like seeing the wider areas with better continuous data than the b&w aerials.

This isn't a big issue, but when I zoom out to 1024M Landsat image set, I get the zoomed out too far message and no tiles. When selected in drop down menu, all the tiles are greyed with "Tile request is invalid, theme id is incorrect".

It looks like there is really just one actual image set, with two scaled sets for 64M and 256M?

Also, from these images, it looks like we are living on Mars!

Happy New Year and keep up the good work.

Steve

54
Beta Testing / Bugs in 2.04
« on: July 01, 2004, 06:29:15 AM »
Quote (Alan @ June 29 2004,8:32)
We've tried to address these in the 2.05 beta.  Please let us know if the dialog resizing works now (it always did for us!)

After letting my GPS dry out, the dialog box works fine now. I can see what those buttons were now! I forgot to mention in the first post that there was no way to resize the window horizontally, so I could not access the buttons other than tabbing. I was kind of wondering what the buttons were doing. Thanks.

55
Beta Testing / Bugs in 2.04
« on: June 30, 2004, 08:47:50 AM »
Quote
I agree on the UTM coords, check 2.05.  I'll see what I can do about making some digits larger, I think it's a good idea.


Thanks for the change. However, now the real time update of the coordinates is messed up after viewing in 3D mode. Switch to 3D mode, then back to 2D, then using the hand tool move the map. I'm getting negative 1 in both E and N boxes (the lat long is messed up as well, perhaps this problem predates 2.05).

56
Archived - Feedback and Comments / Grids and Printing
« on: June 24, 2004, 09:37:50 AM »
I'll restate my desire to have a grid feature added. This is really needed if the printed maps are to be used in the field with a GPS for accurate positioning. I was on a long trip this past weekend and although I normally carry TopoUSA maps (because of the grid feature!), I had Topofusion maps with me. Not being able to pinpoint our position on the map really delayed us at 1 am in the morning. And it really is a pain to create both a Topofusion Map and a TopoUSA map for each trip.

On the printing front, an idea occured to me that might be a quick temporary fix for a full printing function. If you added the ability to scroll exactly one screen horizontal and/or vertical using a keystroke or something, then the exported screens would be fairly easy to paste into a large image before printing. I know this can be done to some extent now, but it's time consuming and hard on the eyes. Just an idea.

Steve

57
Beta Testing / Bugs in 2.04
« on: June 24, 2004, 09:24:18 AM »
These are a few things I've noticed in this version, and they probably predate it as well.

1. When importing GPS data, the dialog window not resized properly to show the buttons (for me, none of the buttons are visible). This is a nightmare when trying to import GPS tracks since you have to select which ones you want to download.

2. The column headings for Northing and Easting in the Waypoints Tab of the File Properties are reversed. (In addition, it seems like N and E would be more useful on the main screen when UTM coords are used than Y and X. Also, putting in the fractions serves no useful purpose and makes the N and E harder to read/copy. Actually, I like the method used by some map makers to make part of the number in a larger font to aid reading.

Steve

58
Beta Testing / Color Aerials - new in v2.04
« on: June 09, 2004, 07:10:07 AM »
Great addition. However, the Load Maps Tool doesn't work very well. I zoomed out to include the entire Tucson area, clicked on all the boxes for tiles, and it didn't come close to retrieving all of them. It only reported 100,000 tiles for the area, but I suspect it has a lot more at 0.25 meter resolution. Back to the 'ol panning days for now!

59
Beta Testing / 3D fly through request
« on: April 20, 2004, 02:51:46 PM »
Slow day, huh? ;)

60
Beta Testing / Creating Waypoint Problem
« on: March 30, 2004, 07:08:07 AM »
This bug is still in TF 1.71 beta. Just switch to NAD 27 datum, and try to create a waypoint. Most of the time you will get an error. It does not matter what the zone is.

61
Beta Testing / Blue Ball - option for removing it?
« on: March 25, 2004, 11:57:33 AM »
I like to zoom into a place I've been and look around by rotating the 3D map. However, to rotate around a point located on the ground, the ball grows to a very large size. Is there anyway to turn it off. If not, having this option in the future would be much appreciated. It looks quite funny on exported views!

62
Beta Testing / Creating Waypoint Problem
« on: March 22, 2004, 08:29:07 AM »
Quote
Please send us any and all gpx files that cause TF to fail to load.


I haven't been able to reproduce the failure, but will send files if it happens again.

Quote
Could you give us any more info on your waypoint problem?  Are you in UTM/LL display, Datum, zoom area.  I haven't been able to recreate it.  Any tips?


I thought it was a widespread problem, but if I'm the only one then that's a bit strange. I completely uninstalled TF, reinstalled 1.52, then 1.70 beta.

After this I narrowed it down to the NAD 27 Datum. I believe this is the datum used for most USGS paper maps. It's useful to provide coordinates that others can use with paper maps, so I like to use that datum for my waypoints. The individual DRG files retain the datum of the paper map.

Have you ever asked Terraserver what datum they used when they created their database? I looked on their site and can't find any reference to datum. Presumably, they had to change all the maps to the same datum before creating the tiles.

Also, many of the DRGs have UTM grid lines from the paper maps. In order to use these you have to have the right datum in TF (for waypoints) as well as in the GPS.

63
Beta Testing / Edges in adjacent DEM files
« on: March 12, 2004, 04:55:58 PM »
Quote (Alan @ Mar. 12 2004,2:06)
Anyway, I have gone to the trouble of adding in support for the geographic reference system.  In order to do it properly so

Hey, thanks for adding the geograhic coordinate format. I did not look what 3DEM was doing, but would agree just putting in min elevations is very bad. When the converted data are displayed in 3DEM, it doesn't show these min elevation points. I thought it was just throwing that info away.

The gaps between sets appeared in other programs as well, like dlgview, so when the grid is rotated I guess at least one line of elevation data is lost.

The seamless NED set uses the NAD83 datum, so this may be one reason it doesn't quite line up with the DRG data, although I thought most of that was based on the NAD27 datum, which would also cause problems I suppose with WGS84. I have found the individual DEM files line up the best with the DRGs from terraserver, although it will be interesting to see how well the original, geographic referenced NED files, line up.

BTW, if TF is ever ported over to a different data system that doesn't use UTM zones, then the geographic coordinate system would be a better way to show the entire data set, without gaps across zones.

64
Beta Testing / Creating Waypoint Problem
« on: March 12, 2004, 09:21:07 AM »
In beta 1.65,

Clicking on a map to add a waypoint often, but not always, creates a nonsense location. Or rather it has no idea where it is, so it enters a position like this: 0° 0' 1.#R" S, (-1.#QNAN in UTM). This, or something related to this, corrupted a gpx file causing TF to fail to load.

On a separate issue, TF allows symbol names to be used with waypoints, but as far as I can tell, it always uses a blue square on the maps. Is this the way it's suppose to work, or are we suppose to see different symbols?

65
Beta Testing / Edges in adjacent DEM files
« on: March 01, 2004, 07:56:36 AM »
Quote (Alan @ Feb. 29 2004,2:09)

Quote
The code makes assumptions that you don't have duplicate data for any area, it's one of the reasons that it's fast.


For the most part I think you have made good decisions when it comes to performance and I would continue to opt for speed over perfect display.

Quote
It was really intended for the classic 7.5 minute NAD27 ascii dem files.


I don't think you'll be able to completely eliminate edge effects with the separate UTM files unless you create some sort of topo generator to create realistic elevations where the data is missing. Even this would create artifacts that the eye could pick up. This, I believe, is one reason they created the seamless NED dataset.

Quote
After I finish fully supporting them (with respect to edges) I'll look into other data sets.


Thanks. I've tried the different methods for getting data and I still think the seamless server is the easiest. You don't have to know the names of anything, just zoom in on the topographic area of interest and download it. The only disadvantage so far is you can get such a large area that the DEM files takes awhile to load. I downloaded the entire Grand Canyon area in one shot and it created a 177 MB DEM file.

In other words, the DEM data cache works better with smaller individual files, which makes complete sense. Most programs that can convert the data, however, can also break up the files into smaller areas, as well as the server itself.

I don't consider the overlap a major problem and I'll restate that between the two, I would choose speed over making the edges look perfect (unless of course it could be done with little penalty). It's not that noticeable when map data is overlayed anyway.

66
Archived Support / What areas is the sattelite imagery available for?
« on: February 29, 2004, 09:04:40 PM »
There is no aerial photography for Hawaii from Microsoft's Terraserver, where Topofusion gets its content. You can see the region of coverage on the home page of Terraserver:

http://www.terraserver-usa.com/

Although most of the lower 48 is covered, both in DRG topographic maps and DOQQ aerial photography, there are regions that are messed up. Hawaii has numerous problems with its DRG coverage as well.

67
Archived - Feedback and Comments / Grids and Printing
« on: February 29, 2004, 04:36:38 PM »
Topofusion is a great program that needs just a few more basic features before I can stop using other programs.

1. Overlay Coordinate Grid. A grid that displays the coordinates (lat/lon/utm) so that a printed map can be used with GPS in the field. This could be done over the map like TopoUSA, or on the margins if no. 2 below is added like Maptech. I really consider this a necessary feature for GPS map software. Currently I don't take Topofusion maps into the field because I can't use them with GPS.

2. Print function, a basic feature for any program really. Screen capture is ok for saving screen images for viewing on the computer, but printouts suffer from not using the highest resolution available from the tiles.

Thanks for the great software and the continuing updates.

68
Beta Testing / Edges in adjacent DEM files
« on: February 29, 2004, 12:33:31 PM »
The problem I am having with using DEM data is the seams between DEM files are visable. To my surprise, this even happens when viewing adjacent DEM files from original UTM files, such as those from the site from Tom Harvey. It is a bigger problem in files obtained from the National DEM seamless set, even though this set should be "seamless". Since TF does not recognize geographic coordinates, the files from NDEM must be converted. This ends up in large gaps when the area is broken up by the server:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_n....ver.jpg

Even when it is overlapped, by selecting overlapping areas on the NED server it is visible:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_n....ver.jpg

The DEM files in the original UTM format also are discontinuous between files:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_n....all.jpg

Presumably this problem could be fixed by allowing TF to read DEM files saved with geographic coordinates. I believe the only seamless DEM data set is the national one, which is available in 1 degree resolution across the whole country. It's also available in 1/3 degree for much of it.

Steve

69
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 29, 2004, 12:08:21 PM »
Quote (mikewager @ Feb. 25 2004,10:50)
I merge/subset and convert the data using Global Mapper.

This is a nice program, but for $179 it's a bit steep for just converting data sets. I will post a message soon about the way different DEM data sets are displayed in TF.

70
Beta Testing / Future Feature: Saved Viewpoints
« on: February 13, 2004, 11:48:35 AM »
Since the 3D view is not realtime, it would be very useful to be able to save the viewpoint (height, direction and angle of view) so it could be returned to by loading up the viewpint. It takes quite a bit of time to get a specific view using the iterative process of moving the scene and pressing 'r'.

71
Beta Testing / Bugs in beta 1.61
« on: February 13, 2004, 11:42:29 AM »
Excessive swapping of DEM files

I've placed ten 10M DEM files into my folder and there are viewpoints where TF swaps the files back and forth while generating the 3D view. It goes back and forth as reported by the green text at the top of the screen. This occurs no matter what the mesh size is. It even swaps between two files when there should be plenty of memory available (50% of system, 1 GB RAM).

Error window when changing options preferences in 3D screen

I get an error message when I change options in the preferences dialog box while in 3D mode (not the 3D settings). 3D scenes fail to load after this and it requires a program restart.

72
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 13, 2004, 08:34:58 AM »
Quote (Alan @ Feb. 12 2004,7:09)
Also, the dem file produced by 3DEM is not 'geographic reference system'.  It is code 3 which I've been unable so far to find out what it means.

This may have to do with the version you are using. I've tried ver 18.6 and 15.7. The info after the header is 1 1 0 if you don't convert to UTM coordinates first. The 0 indicates geographic coordinate system and it uses lat/lon throughout the file.

73
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 13, 2004, 08:02:44 AM »
Quote

This still makes no sense at all to me.  When I download an area from http://seamless.usgs.gov/viewer.htm I get exactly the area that I drew a rectangle around.  I see the option to break it up into sizes of 25/50/75/100, so what?


If the map isn't broken up, then it will display fine as one DEM file. It is only when it is broken into smaller files that those files do not line up. I would agree if you are going to define each download using the rectangles (avoiding the automated splitting), then you would need to overlap them a fair amount anyway. The problem occurred for me when I wanted to download the entire Grand Canyon area. Can't be done in less than 100 mb. Also, this site provides higher res DEMs in some areas.

Question: When DEMs overlap, how does TF handle it? One file will define the elevation as 0 (or possibly -9999), the other correctly. How does it know which one to use?

Quote
If I've already downloaded the lower half of the catalinas and I go back to download the upper half, I've got to do significant overlap or there will be a significant gap, right?


The gap comes about because after the NED file is converted to UTM coordinates, it is rotated somewhat. But the file is saved as a true rectangle with 90 degree corners. I'm not sure at this time whether some of the elevation points are clipped to make a rectangle of the same size (before and after converting), or whether TF is creating the gap by reading 0 height data points from one of the files.

Quote
I obviously don't know enough about the seamless server and its formats, but I'm not sure that I want to.


The format that is easiest to use is GeoTIFF. The default format is ARCView, which I haven't figure out a way to convert. BIL is the smallest download size.

74
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 12, 2004, 06:07:39 PM »
Quote (Alan @ Feb. 12 2004,12:09)

Quote
What are you using to convert the NED files to UTM?  In a few searches I came up with nothing.

3DEM

Quote
I'm not sure I understand this.  What adjacent areas?  If you use the USGS download thing to download two different chunks, the 'seamlessness' of it is reliant on your ability to draw rectangles.  


The chunks that are downloaded are self consistent. No problem with that. The max you can download is 100MB. The viewer breaks the files into pieces automatically. But when they are coverted to UTM, the program I use (above) clips the edges (rotation is always involved) and saves the resulting DEM as a rectangle, with 90 degree angles. These UTM rectangles are not seamless with each other. I guess you could resort to areas less than 100 MB, and then overlap them enough so TF has enough data to fill in the gaps.

I don't know of any other program that converts from geographic to UTM, except maybe Grass5. Haven't had the time to fool around with that one.

75
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 11, 2004, 03:12:54 PM »
Quote (Alan @ Feb. 05 2004,10:34)
You're right that it only accepts UTM ground reference systems.  I don't see a compelling reason to support others.

You might consider adding at least one additional DEM coordinate system to TF, the geographic one used by the seamless National Elevation Data set. It also involves a few conversions, but at least you can point to a map and get the whole area you are interested in one shot.

The problem with converting the geographic system to UTM is once the area is rotated and converted, adjacent areas no longer are seamless. It's ok if the area you're intersted can be downloaded in one chunk.

Check out the server for getting the geographic coordinate NED data.

http://seamless.usgs.gov/viewer.htm

click on the United States Viewer link. There are several resolutions available and several file formats. GeoTIFF works with many viewers/converters but BIL is by far the most efficient. I think the entire Grand Canyon downloaded in less than 6 MB compressed and converted to over 50 MB DEM file.

Biggest advantage to this server is the graphic interface and ability to grab the whole area at once with no knowledge of quad names.

76
Beta Testing / "Shadow" GPS trail in 3d
« on: February 10, 2004, 11:08:04 AM »
Quote (Alan @ Feb. 08 2004,8:59)
Quote (mcuma @ Feb. 08 2004,12:58)
One more little thing, the screen capture does not work in 3D, but, that's not really a big deal.


Right, I'll have to come up with something to do exports in 3d mode.

Since TF just does screen captures at the moment, might as well just download a screen capture program. I like MWSnap, found here

http://www.mirekw.com/winfreeware/mwsnap.html

but there are many others.

77
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 06, 2004, 02:14:40 PM »
Quote (ddunne @ Feb. 05 2004,11:58)
-active display area in 3d rendered - would be nice to manually reduce/enlarge displayed area, (i.e. - my 128Mb graphics card cooks - i can hande ALOT, but my buddy's integrated 32Mb video is struggling...)

You can do this by zooming while in 3D, then refreshing with the 'r' key. I zoom with the wheel on the mouse. Also use the 'r' key after moving the map with the right mouse button.

78
Beta Testing / Future sky color and blank tile texture
« on: February 06, 2004, 12:50:43 PM »
Boy, that came out screwed up. I know how to use the quote brackets, but it eludes me how to get the person's name who I'm quoting next to it.

79
Beta Testing / Future sky color and blank tile texture
« on: February 06, 2004, 12:48:18 PM »
Quote (Alan @ Feb. 06 2004,11:09)
Quote
1. colored horizon, gradient if possible to simulate sky


Kind of cheesy in my opinion, but very easy to add.

I like it, though one thing I consider cheesy is those simulated trees in TopoUSA 4.0.

Quote
2. uniform tile texture option so elevation can be looked at by itself. Similar to download check tile, but just a uniform color. I personally like grey, but could be any color.


You can do white right now, just turn off the map and then go to 3d mode.

Cool, this is exactly what I was looking for. Never used that feature before. For those of you, like me, didn't know about this feature, it's the green and brown checkerboard button in the tool bar.

One observation. The triangle mesh is very apparent and appears as diamond shaped crosses from the lighting reflecting off the faces. This is also noticable with maps on, but quite clear with the white texture. I think there is a way to minimize or even remove it. I know if you reduce the reflectivity and increase the emissivity, it will lessen it. VRML has a way of smoothing the edges between two polygons.

Sorry if the quotes don't come out right. Trying to figure out how to quote with this message board.

Quote
1. colored horizon, gradient if possible to simulate sky


Kind of cheesy in my opinion, but very easy to add.

I like it, though one thing I consider cheesy is those simulated trees in TopoUSA 4.0.

Quote
2. uniform tile texture option so elevation can be looked at by itself. Similar to download check tile, but just a uniform color. I personally like grey, but could be any color.


You can do white right now, just turn off the map and then go to 3d mode.

Cool, this is exactly what I was looking for. Never used that feature before. For those of you, like me, didn't know about this feature, it's the green and brown checkerboard button in the tool bar.

One observation. The triangle mesh is very apparent and appears as diamond shaped crosses from the lighting reflecting off the faces. This is also noticable with maps on, but quite clear with the white texture. I think there is a way to minimize or even remove it. I know if you reduce the reflectivity and increase the emissivity, it will lessen it. VRML has a way of smoothing the edges between two polygons.

Sorry if the quotes don't come out right. Trying to figure out how to quote with this message board.

80
Beta Testing / Future sky color and blank tile texture
« on: February 06, 2004, 08:48:24 AM »
You may have already thought of this, but a couple of small improvements for the 3D viewing would be

1. colored horizon, gradient if possible to simulate sky

2. uniform tile texture option so elevation can be looked at by itself. Similar to download check tile, but just a uniform color. I personally like grey, but could be any color.

Great job guys!

81
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 05, 2004, 11:56:00 AM »
The seamless NEDs come off the server that way, either in an Arcview, GeoTiff or SPOT file. I can convert it to a DEM, but the coordinate system they use is geographic. I remember some time ago using a coordinate conversion program. Just have to find it. Thanks for the quick reply.

82
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 05, 2004, 10:06:19 AM »
Alan,

Are there any limits to the size of the DEM file? I've put together quite a few for Tucson, but nothing shows up. It's 3464x2518. It loads up in a different viewer. In a related issue, does the DEM have to be of a certain type? This file is in the geographic coordinate system, where as TF seems to only want UTM based ones. Thanks.

83
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 04, 2004, 09:54:42 AM »
Quote
I've been playing with swapping a 10m and 30m of the same place and I too don't see much difference either, I guess that's just how it is.


I too played around with TF and same area DEM files and did not see too much until the resolution was around 1-2m per pixel. And it wasn't alot.

However, I think TF is throwing away significant amounts of the 10m DEM info. Here are some snapshots of another program's representation of the DEM data:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_n....nap.jpg
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_n....nap.jpg

Here are VRML representations of the same data if you'd like to take a closer look:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_newcomb/topofusion/AC10Meter.wrl
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/steve_newcomb/topofusion/AC30Meter.wrl

On the whole I think the 30m data works fine for TF's viewer and it will be much easier to compile a wide area single DEM file of this resolution. If you have the time and it's easy, throw in a parameter for the grid size of the model so 10m (or even higher res in the future) DEMs are shown in their full res.

84
Beta Testing / Bugs in Beta 1.54
« on: February 02, 2004, 02:30:52 PM »
1. switching tiles set in 2d mode no longer changes tiles automatically. Must move location to see new tile set.

2. Pressing 'r' in 2d mode shows black screen. Pressing '3' after this puts you somewhere on the equator! Must restart.

3. Vertical Exaggeration is not saved between starts.

I put all of them in one post because this board limits users to 1 post per 25 minutes.

Steve

85
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 02, 2004, 01:00:39 PM »
oh, I forgot why I was posting in the first place. The program loads 10m data files, but it appears the same as 30m files (as far as I can tell). Is there a way to view the additional elevation information?

Steve

86
Beta Testing / Beta released
« on: February 02, 2004, 12:39:05 PM »
Very good 1st go around. Noticed a few quirks (bugs) right away. Do you want them posted here, or by email?

If not too much effort, a full screen mode would be cool and help the user get that "full-immersion" virtual reality feeling  '<img'>

Steve

87
Beta Testing / Other SDTS Sources
« on: February 02, 2004, 12:33:56 PM »
This page (click on 1:24K DEM graphic)

http://edc.usgs.gov/geodata/

lists 2 other sources for free SDTS files, both of which are faster than gisdatadepot. The mapmart was 560 kBps, atdi 17 kBps. The mapmart is limited to 10 files per order, but it appears easy to place additional "orders".

There are other sources for DEM info, but would require coding for different file format.

Pages: 1 [2]