Jump to content

Colorado update, Montana & California build thread...


IndyJpr
Followers 10

Recommended Posts

Some folks may have noticed two (the only two found) issues with the Montana Mapset v1.00 by IndyJpr.

 

Add Going to the Sun highway in Glacier National Park. On the east side it is shown as a prominent red line, on the west side as a minor thin grey line (and that is when zoomed in). I know it is seasonal, but it used to be the paved through road across the park.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean the only issues but I should have said larger issues. There will always be the minor issues such as a road designation that's off (The Goin-To-The-Sun Rd issue) or POI's that are slightly off etc. (The Going To The Sun Road should show up better on the actual GPS unit). Your right however, it is an issue and could be remedied in the future.

 

When I described the other two issues I was refering to them as being more critical, more of a data/processing flaw than a style or omission issue.

 

Lets not be too critical however because you gotta admit, these maps by IndyJpr are the best GPS maps available to mankind BY FAR. Lightyears ahead of anything else offered, yes even better than the National Geographic Topo that someday Magellan users dream of using on their Tritons. Why? Because of the landowner information, the high resolution water data, the Bathymetric data and on and on.

 

In my opinion, anyone living in these states that is considering the map quality offered by the various company's before purchasing a GPS you have to go with the Garmin simply based on these MapSets.

 

Edited to add: ...calm down maggie fans, its simply my opinion. :unsure:

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment
1) The Bathymetric lines for Flathead Lake have errors. These errors seem to be the result of the raw data being skewed slightly AND the '0' depth contours not being taken out. Corrected data has been sent to IndyJpr for implementation.

 

2) On Indian Reservations, random water features do not show up. This error is due to some kind of draw order priority error. Where the Indian reservation polygon is drawn over the water features. I have sent IndyJpr a TYP file that corrects the draw order priority and colors the land owner information (Pink=State, Orange=BLM, Green=USFS, NPS, USFWS, BOR)

Hello all,

 

I hope to have a small patch available this weekend to address the above issues.

 

I haven't accomplished a lot over the last week except trying to get things cleaned up and organized. Basically ran out of disk space and have been dealing with that.

 

Current effort (not including the Montana patch):

- Colorado trail work

- California data processing

- testing some transparent overlay maps

 

Upcoming effort:

- major Wyoming revision

- minor Utah revision plus trail work

Edited by IndyJpr
Link to comment

In my opinion, anyone living in these states that is considering the map quality offered by the various company's before purchasing a GPS you have to go with the Garmin simply based on these MapSets.

I concur. I did my research before I bought (a lot of which was reading forum posts here), and the popularity of Garmin, their excellent customer service reputation and the ability to create custom maps made it a no-brainer to go with Garmin.

Link to comment

Hey, just wanted to make sure you received the zip file that I emailed you (Bob Marshall Trail Info).

 

Lalita

 

Hey Lalita,

 

Hailing from Helena here. I just want to say hi and ask you where you got the Bob Marshall Data? COOL! Could you send me a copy? I would love to make a transparent map that could overlay on top of my other maps. I could make a transparent map and send you the finished product. You would be able to overlay it on top of IndyJpr's awesome mapset until he can someday hopefully incorporate it! Would you be so kind as to e-mail the shapefile? My e-mail is

 

lampropeltis-at-gmail-dot-com

 

Thanks!

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

 

Hey Lalita,

 

Hailing from Helena here. I just want to say hi and ask you where you got the Bob Marshall Data? COOL! Could you send me a copy? I would love to make a transparent map that could overlay on top of my other maps. I could make a transparent map and send you the finished product. You would be able to overlay it on top of IndyJpr's awesome mapset until he can someday hopefully incorporate it! Would you be so kind as to e-mail the shapefile? My e-mail is

 

lampropeltis-at-gmail-dot-com

 

Thanks!

 

Emailed you!

Link to comment

I just downloaded and executed the Montana update. Going to the Sun road, thru Glacier National Park, still shows the road only on the east side of Logan Pass.

 

Otherwise, that's a great map! Thank you!

 

Icrans,

 

It appears as though your saying the rod stops at Logan Pass coming from the East. The "Going To The Sun Road" IS there and does keep going all the way down past Lake McDonald. Its there but hard to see in Mapsource. It should show up alot better on your GPS.

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

I just downloaded and executed the Montana update. Going to the Sun road, thru Glacier National Park, still shows the road only on the east side of Logan Pass.

 

Otherwise, that's a great map! Thank you!

 

Icrans,

 

It appears as though your saying the rod stops at Logan Pass coming from the East. The "Going To The Sun Road" IS there and does keep going all the way down past Lake McDonald. Its there but hard to see in Mapsource. It should show up alot better on your GPS.

 

Well, not really....the road is certainly still there, altho' covered so deeply with snow that you wouldn't know it. at least for a couple months. At least it was there last fall when it was closed for repairs. What I meant was that east of Logan pass it is shown as a highway, not a single faint line. The below quote from Snowfleurys on a different thread I think explains it well:

 

"I checked the Census data for Flathead county. Going to the Sun highway is code S1400 (Local/rural road or city street) and not as S1200 secondary road (highway). Flathead county has undergone realignment so the locations should be right on. Just an error in coding by Census and/or the contractor. I am sure there are many more in the data set - always is."

Link to comment

With all these different great new state maps being done, is there anyway to make them all part of the same mapset instead of seperate mapset for each state? That would make things easier to manage in mapsource and on the GPS.

 

Have you all been getting the trail data from the Forest Service? I've gotten it now from several National Forests in the East. They also generally have shapfiles for roads. All you have to do is email thier general contact info on thier website or call and ask for the GIS person. The national office has ruled they have to provide all this data. If they question it or hesitate, tell them they need to check with the Naitonal FOIA Office as they have ruled it must be released.

Link to comment

With all these different great new state maps being done, is there anyway to make them all part of the same mapset instead of seperate mapset for each state? That would make things easier to manage in mapsource and on the GPS.

 

Yes, PLEASE.......

 

One map to rule them all!!!

Link to comment

With all these different great new state maps being done, is there anyway to make them all part of the same mapset instead of seperate mapset for each state? That would make things easier to manage in mapsource and on the GPS.

 

Have you all been getting the trail data from the Forest Service? I've gotten it now from several National Forests in the East. They also generally have shapfiles for roads. All you have to do is email thier general contact info on thier website or call and ask for the GIS person. The national office has ruled they have to provide all this data. If they question it or hesitate, tell them they need to check with the Naitonal FOIA Office as they have ruled it must be released.

Link to comment

With all these different great new state maps being done, is there anyway to make them all part of the same mapset instead of seperate mapset for each state? That would make things easier to manage in mapsource and on the GPS.

From http://www.miscjunk.org/mj/mp_effort.html

 

If you choose to support this effort by donating $35 or more I would like to thank you by sending you a State Topo Maps CD. This consolidated mapset is built from all of the individual state mapsets and is not available for download.
Link to comment

With all these different great new state maps being done, is there anyway to make them all part of the same mapset instead of seperate mapset for each state? That would make things easier to manage in mapsource and on the GPS.

 

Have you all been getting the trail data from the Forest Service? I've gotten it now from several National Forests in the East. They also generally have shapfiles for roads. All you have to do is email thier general contact info on thier website or call and ask for the GIS person. The national office has ruled they have to provide all this data. If they question it or hesitate, tell them they need to check with the Naitonal FOIA Office as they have ruled it must be released.

 

As far as I know if you can load them all into Mapsource you should be able to

Link to comment

First, I have to say that I truly, truly appreciate the work that the community is putting into the generation of these mapsets. It's somewhat of a dream come true. Thank you.

 

Second, just wanted to add my two cents to the discussion on the VR6 maps of California. In short, the contours are nice, but there are some drawbacks. The data, as mentioned, is a bit old for the roads. Road names are hit and miss depending on the size. The .img is delivered in one gigantic 1.0Gb file, making it a little difficult for the load or processing. The file size also seems to be a little problematic as when I pan around on my Legend Cx, there seems to be some interference with the map and the basemap and the fine data pops in and out as you pan around. Kinda glitchy. I think it pushes the memory limitations of the eTrex. Still, it was better than what I had before. :mad:

 

Finally, I can't donate much to the community in the way of dollars, but I have come across gobs of data for California, Wyoming and other locations. I can provide links if there's something you feel you're missing. I can also provide hosting. My hosting service has a very large pipe for monthly traffic and I'm more than willing to provide a mirror.

 

Thanks again for all the work.

Link to comment

I just downloaded and executed the Montana update. Going to the Sun road, thru Glacier National Park, still shows the road only on the east side of Logan Pass.

 

Otherwise, that's a great map! Thank you!

 

Icrans,

 

It appears as though your saying the rod stops at Logan Pass coming from the East. The "Going To The Sun Road" IS there and does keep going all the way down past Lake McDonald. Its there but hard to see in Mapsource. It should show up alot better on your GPS.

 

Well, not really....the road is certainly still there, altho' covered so deeply with snow that you wouldn't know it. at least for a couple months. At least it was there last fall when it was closed for repairs. What I meant was that east of Logan pass it is shown as a highway, not a single faint line. The below quote from Snowfleurys on a different thread I think explains it well:

 

"I checked the Census data for Flathead county. Going to the Sun highway is code S1400 (Local/rural road or city street) and not as S1200 secondary road (highway). Flathead county has undergone realignment so the locations should be right on. Just an error in coding by Census and/or the contractor. I am sure there are many more in the data set - always is."

 

I just checked the Tiger2008 data that just came out and instead of Logan Pass being half secondary highway and half residential street, it is just all residential street. I sent the tiger2008 data to IndyJpr and he may decide to add it in a future update. I guess it would be nice to see it better as you drive accross the park, and I agree that the light gray roads are a bit$h to see. Is that road really a Highway? or is it just a well traveled two laner that cuts through the park?

 

I have also generated a comprehensive trail layer that includes the USFS trail data, n2stich's digitizing of Nat Geo Topo trails, and some of the Tiger2000 trails. Its MUCH improved trail layer and I've also sent that data to IndyJpr for possible inclusion in a future update.

Link to comment

 

I just checked the Tiger2008 data that just came out and instead of Logan Pass being half secondary highway and half residential street, it is just all residential street. I sent the tiger2008 data to IndyJpr and he may decide to add it in a future update. I guess it would be nice to see it better as you drive accross the park, and I agree that the light gray roads are a bit$h to see. Is that road really a Highway? or is it just a well traveled two laner that cuts through the park?

I have also generated a comprehensive trail layer that includes the USFS trail data, n2stich's digitizing of Nat Geo Topo trails, and some of the Tiger2000 trails. Its MUCH improved trail layer and I've also sent that data to IndyJpr for possible inclusion in a future update.

 

If you haven't had the opportunity to drive GTTS you should certainly plan a trip to Glacier Nat Park so that you can do that. Glacier is where the Gods sat when they created the rest of the world, and this road takes you right thru the middle. 2-lane, narrow, very windy, no vehicles/RV's over 21 feet, average speed 20-25 miles/hour. Scenic viewpoints every 50 feet or so, and if you sneeze at the wrong time you may find yourself trying to 'drive' vertically down the face of a cliff. If you want to see some pictures of what GNP is all about, go to glacierparkchat.com and look around.

 

P.S.....if you don't like mountains, forget it.

Link to comment

First, I have to say that I truly, truly appreciate the work that the community is putting into the generation of these mapsets. It's somewhat of a dream come true. Thank you.

 

Second, just wanted to add my two cents to the discussion on the VR6 maps of California. In short, the contours are nice, but there are some drawbacks. The data, as mentioned, is a bit old for the roads. Road names are hit and miss depending on the size. The .img is delivered in one gigantic 1.0Gb file, making it a little difficult for the load or processing. The file size also seems to be a little problematic as when I pan around on my Legend Cx, there seems to be some interference with the map and the basemap and the fine data pops in and out as you pan around. Kinda glitchy. I think it pushes the memory limitations of the eTrex. Still, it was better than what I had before. :ph34r:

 

I'm the person who generated the California topo map that's been discussed and is hosted here

http://www.vr6.com/gps/map-dl.htm

 

My map is freely distributed as the 1.03 GB file to be copied onto a 2GB microSD card. I tried to make the download/installation process as simple as possible. Those who do not own Garmin Mapsource or other software can still use it. Those who follow the installation instructions are being successful. The most common glitch seems to be those who don't follow the instructions, and don't put the map file in a folder named Garmin. I also know of one person who had a defective 2 GB microSD card.

 

FYI, I started this project with zero background in GIS or mapmaking. I am a volunteer search-and-rescue dog handler in California. I bought a Garmin 60csx for its superior reception under dense tree canopy and high contrast mapping display. I was disappointed with the quality of Garmin's Topo software, and I couldn't find a 3rd party alternative. So I dove in, learned how to use some of the tools and freely available datasets, and generated a topo map for my use and for others in SAR. If non-SAR people find it useful for their needs too, that's cool.

 

We don't all have the same needs for GPS topo maps. For example, I've noticed some here express concerns about what my map looks like when zoomed farther back than I and SAR colleagues would use our GPSr. To be honest, it never occurred to me that anyone would care what the map looks like when zoomed that far back.

 

In wilderness SAR, we are assigned relatively small areas to systematically search, often in some grid pattern or modified grid pattern. To do this, we need as much information about the trails, roads, 4WD roads, logging roads, powerlines, etc. that we will encounter in these wilderness areas as possible. For wilderness SAR, it's more important that the GPS display the features that we will encounter in these wilderness areas while searching than to display the roads for a subdivision that was built 5 years ago, or name the features.

 

Over the past year, most everybody I know in SAR has upgraded to a Garmin 60csx.

 

The data I used for roads, trails, powerlines, water features, etc (everything but the contours) was USGS DLG SDTS data files, based on 1:100K USGS topo maps. The only exception is a subset of the San Francisco Bay Area which uses 1:24K USGS DLG SDTS data. I would have preferred to use data derived from 1:24K topo maps for the whole thing but the USGS has provided only small portion of California in 1:24K USGS DLG SDTS data format, and it's an extremely complex patchwork. If there is an alternative complete source for California 1:24K USGS data that I don't have to pay a ton of money to obtain, I'd like to be pointed in that direction.

 

Names for the roads and water features aren't included in my map because it wasn't apparent to me how to include names and it wasn't important enough for me to try to figure out how to do it.

 

Yes, USGS 1:100K topo maps are out of date for street maps. So are 1:24K USGS topo maps, though they are somewhat better. Other data sets are better if street maps are one's main objective. But if those other datasets are used instead, do we give up anything in terms of trails, logging roads, 4WD roads, and powerlines that are shown on USGS topo maps? If so, for SAR, that is not a good tradeoff.

 

Contour line on my topo map were derived from USGS DEM data which in turn was mostly derived from USGS 1:24K topo maps (USGS Seamless website, 1/3 arc second dataset). For California, I've seen USGS 1:24K topo maps with contour intervals of 5, 10, 20, 40, and 80 feet, and some have contour intervals in meters. My choice of a 20 foot contour interval for all of California was something of a compromise. It does a better job of resolving terrain features than a 40 foot interval does in those areas where the USGS DEM data came from maps with a 5, 10, or 20 foot contour interval. It adds no additional terrain detail (only a mathematical interpolation) for areas where the USGS DEM data came from maps with 40 foot, 80 foot, or 20 meter intervals. Again, in SAR we want the most resolution of the terrain detail as we can get.

 

For SAR, the main difference between my topo map and Garmin Topo is the detailed contour lines on my map. I regularly train and search in areas where the USGS 1:24 topo map has 20 foot contour intervals, and the contour lines on my GPSr look nearly identical to those on the paper USGS 1:24K topo map that I also carry. That may not seem as important to others, but it's important in SAR. Among other advantages, I can orient myself on the paper map very quickly and accurately by comparing contour lines on the GPSr and paper map.

 

For SAR, I don't find it to be a significant drawback that my GPS topo map cannot be viewed from Garmin Mapsource. There are better computer-based topo mapping products than the Garmin products. I prefer Maptech Terrain Navigator Pro, which is installed on both my home desktop and the laptop I carry in my SAR vehicle.

 

It sounds like others who are GIS savvy are developing a California topo map that will include named features, more roads, vegetation type, and perhaps some other data. I'm all for this, please do it. If you develop a better topo map than mine, that would be much appreciated, I'll use your map too. But please consider making a version available with 20 foot contour intervals. If your map is freely distributed, you can use my contour map files in your map if you'd like, perhaps as a separate version. And please please please use dataset(s) that have as much trail, 4WD road, logging road, powerline, etc data as possible.

 

Just my two cents :-)

Link to comment

Tadpole, for the National Forests, the Forest Service should have lots of the data you want in shapfiles. Most NFs have their trails and roads in shapefiles. Just call or email the National Forest. Ask for the GIS person. See what kind of data they have and ask them to send it to you. Most of the time they do it with no problem. If they resist, tell them the Washington Office has directed this data is to be given to the public and they need to check with the Washtion FOIA (Freedom of Infmormation Act) office. I keep all trail data in a separate transparent map. You get updated trail data all the time. It is much easier to just change the trail map than have to regenerate the entire map. I also use a typ file to change the color of the trail so you can easily see it on the GPS. I use a thin red line.

 

You can also GPS trails.

 

On the zoomed out issue: I use City Navigator with transparent topo and trail maps I make. I don't like topo lines when I am zoomed way out. They are useless at that point and just clutter the map. When you create the mp file from the DEM file, you get four levels of topo lines. I delete the 2 most zoomed out levels. I have one level display up to 500 feet, the second level display from 800 feet to .5 miles, and no topo lines display above a zoom level of .8 miles.

Link to comment

 

I'm the person who generated the California topo map that's been discussed and is hosted here

http://www.vr6.com/gps/map-dl.htm

 

My map is freely distributed as the 1.03 GB file to be copied onto a 2GB microSD card. I tried to make the download/installation process as simple as possible. Those who do not own Garmin Mapsource or other software can still use it. Those who follow the installation instructions are being successful. The most common glitch seems to be those who don't follow the instructions, and don't put the map file in a folder named Garmin. I also know of one person who had a defective 2 GB microSD card.

 

Your directions worked fantastically. I was able to transfer the file to my eTrex with absolutely no issues, save the basemap one that I mentioned above. Clear and concise - and convenient too. Thank you for making this available.

 

For what it's worth, I was able to find the other zip file that you had available on your ftp directory - the one that had the individual .img files of the large CA file. This one actually worked out a little better for me. I was able to download it and import the individual files into Mapsource using cgpsmapper. That way I can load up all or selected portions of California as well as some other areas that I refer to. I was also able to add more detailed roads from Metroguide - on the eTrex, they're overlaid onto the top of your contours. This way, it's the best of both worlds - your fantastic contours and trails and the more recent streets and POIs.

 

The data I used for roads, trails, powerlines, water features, etc (everything but the contours) was USGS DLG SDTS data files, based on 1:100K USGS topo maps. The only exception is a subset of the San Francisco Bay Area which uses 1:24K USGS DLG SDTS data. I would have preferred to use data derived from 1:24K topo maps for the whole thing but the USGS has provided only small portion of California in 1:24K USGS DLG SDTS data format, and it's an extremely complex patchwork. If there is an alternative complete source for California 1:24K USGS data that I don't have to pay a ton of money to obtain, I'd like to be pointed in that direction.

 

For what you're using it for, I agree on the tradeoff between current streets and more accurate trails / contours / etc. Most of the information I've found echoes what you've seen in the USGS SDS datasets. I'm not sure what you used for processing the data prior to import, but if you used Global Mapper, you should be able to select the layers you want to keep. That way you could just provide the trails, wells, hydrography, etc and filter out the roads. Let me dig up what I've got in the form of other datasets. I may have come across some other relevant areas for you. BLM boundaries might be handy for you and vegetation sets too.

 

Names for the roads and water features aren't included in my map because it wasn't apparent to me how to include names and it wasn't important enough for me to try to figure out how to do it.

 

Tiger data from the US Census bureau might be the way to go for that. Open Street Maps has a large repository of data from Tiger and other sources that's able to be imported. I've only touched on this in the last few weeks though, so I'm new from the GPS aspects. The GIS data I'm a little more familiar with.

 

You might also be interested in FAA obstruction data (towers, etc), particularly if you're calling in any kind of air support. Airspaces such as Class D, C and B might be handy and frequencies of local CDF or SAR branches might be useful. All that can be georeferenced to the towers or sites.

 

Contour line on my topo map were derived from USGS DEM data which in turn was mostly derived from USGS 1:24K topo maps (USGS Seamless website, 1/3 arc second dataset). For California, I've seen USGS 1:24K topo maps with contour intervals of 5, 10, 20, 40, and 80 feet, and some have contour intervals in meters. My choice of a 20 foot contour interval for all of California was something of a compromise. It does a better job of resolving terrain features than a 40 foot interval does in those areas where the USGS DEM data came from maps with a 5, 10, or 20 foot contour interval.

 

I think it was a good compromise and I agree at the utility for 20 ft intervals. I hike and kayak around Sacramento and Nevada County and find having what you describe as being close to ideal.

 

For SAR, I don't find it to be a significant drawback that my GPS topo map cannot be viewed from Garmin Mapsource. There are better computer-based topo mapping products than the Garmin products. I prefer Maptech Terrain Navigator Pro, which is installed on both my home desktop and the laptop I carry in my SAR vehicle.

 

See above. Importing it all through cgpsmapper and mapsettoolkit works wonderfully. As far as viewing it from a greater distance, I'd say it's somewhat of a nit. I think it's correctable, but terrain from that distance is hard to distinguish anyway. Is it worth it? Maybe not at this time. It's not quite the product be used for terrain avoidance while flying or driving anyway. Its something that just looks purtier.

 

It sounds like others who are GIS savvy are developing a California topo map that will include named features, more roads, vegetation type, and perhaps some other data. I'm all for this, please do it. If you develop a better topo map than mine, that would be much appreciated, I'll use your map too. But please consider making a version available with 20 foot contour intervals. If your map is freely distributed, you can use my contour map files in your map if you'd like, perhaps as a separate version. And please please please use dataset(s) that have as much trail, 4WD road, logging road, powerline, etc data as possible.

 

Again, thanks for making it all available. Though I called it out as a little glitchy on my GPS, I love it and have been marvelling over it since I downloaded it.

 

-Brian

Link to comment

For what it's worth, I was able to find the other zip file that you had available on your ftp directory - the one that had the individual .img files of the large CA file. This one actually worked out a little better for me. I was able to download it and import the individual files into Mapsource using cgpsmapper. That way I can load up all or selected portions of California as well as some other areas that I refer to. I was also able to add more detailed roads from Metroguide - on the eTrex, they're overlaid onto the top of your contours. This way, it's the best of both worlds - your fantastic contours and trails and the more recent streets and POIs.

 

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, the zip file containing the 400+ individual .img files was uploaded for a colleague who wanted to combine my contours with City Navigator streets. Perhaps similar to what you did.

 

For what you're using it for, I agree on the tradeoff between current streets and more accurate trails / contours / etc. Most of the information I've found echoes what you've seen in the USGS SDS datasets. I'm not sure what you used for processing the data prior to import, but if you used Global Mapper, you should be able to select the layers you want to keep. That way you could just provide the trails, wells, hydrography, etc and filter out the roads. Let me dig up what I've got in the form of other datasets. I may have come across some other relevant areas for you. BLM boundaries might be handy for you and vegetation sets too.

 

Thanks very much, I appreciate it.

 

Initially, since I didn't have the slightest idea what I was doing, I just followed the instructions here:

http://home.cinci.rr.com/creek/garmin.htm

 

I downloaded the DEM data from the USGS Seamless website in chunks no bigger than 75 MB in size. I believe the DEM files totaled about 23 GB. To generate the contours, I used:

DEM2TOPO from: http://people.uleth.ca/~brad.gom/dem2topo/index.htm

GPSMapEdit from www.geopainting.com

cGPSMapper from www.cgpsmapper.com

 

After completing all the contours, for roads, trails, powerlines, water features, etc. I started with Robomatt's SF Bay area map (with his permission) http://www.robomatt.com/maps/downloads/bay_area/

I downloaded 1:100K USGS STDS data for the rest of California. I tried to use STDS2MAP to do the conversions but found it generated an approximate 70 meter offset that I was unable to eliminate. So I bought Global Mapper and did the conversions with that program. It might have been better to have gotten Global Mapper from the start, to do the contours. As it was, the process I used to generate the contours was very time consuming.

 

After doing the conversions with cGPSMapper, I used SendMap to combine everything into the final GMAPSUPP.IMG file.

 

You might also be interested in FAA obstruction data (towers, etc), particularly if you're calling in any kind of air support. Airspaces such as Class D, C and B might be handy and frequencies of local CDF or SAR branches might be useful. All that can be georeferenced to the towers or sites.

 

That's good to know about, I'll look into that. Thank you.

 

I think it was a good compromise and I agree at the utility for 20 ft intervals. I hike and kayak around Sacramento and Nevada County and find having what you describe as being close to ideal.

 

So far, I've had one of my SAR colleagues say he would prefer a 40 foot contour interval and he's in the Sierras. But everybody else who has expressed a preference seems to prefer the 20 foot contour interval, which transitions to a 100 foot interval when zoomed back a bit, and then disappear when zoomed back further.

 

Importing it all through cgpsmapper and mapsettoolkit works wonderfully. As far as viewing it from a greater distance, I'd say it's somewhat of a nit. I think it's correctable, but terrain from that distance is hard to distinguish anyway. Is it worth it? Maybe not at this time. It's not quite the product be used for terrain avoidance while flying or driving anyway. Its something that just looks purtier.

 

Agreed, it could look nicer when zoomed back. Be glad you don't have my first version of the contours, which generated 100 foot contours no matter how far you zoomed out. Useless clutter and extremely slooooowwww.....

 

I'm looking forward to seeing IndyJpr's California topo map.

Link to comment
I'm looking forward to seeing IndyJpr's California topo map.

I have your map on my Colorado. The installation instructions were easy to follow. :rolleyes: I'm also looking forward to what IndyJpr produces, since I was involved with some of the data collection. Any status on the California map? I'm going to be making up SD cards with a California map for some of my friends from Germany that will be out here for GeoWoodstock in May. I want to give them the best possible maps for them to use while they are here. I was just wondering if the California map might be finished by then.

 

--Marky

Link to comment

I just unpacked my brand new Garmin etrex Vista HCx unit today! I can't afford the full blown Garmin maps (if I want to stay married). Really looking forward to seeing the California reliece of your project! I have spent the last 40 hours trying to make maps for myself, but I'm not savvy enough yet to make any of the software work. I get as far as unzipping an IMG file, but things fall apart pretty quickly after that!

Link to comment

ljsan2006, Thank you for making all your hard work available to the rest of us. I got your maps to work, now I'm trying to figure a way to also use MapSource maps on the same microSD card. It seems I can only use one img file on the card at a time, and to use another img file I need to take the card out and rename the files.

Link to comment

f.w.i.w. I'm trying to make an upgraded topo for the state of Missouri by following the tutorial at gpsfiledepot.com. Having never done any mapping I'm not sure how well this will work out. So far I've downloaded all the *.tif files (~ 17hrs) and am now in the process of making *.mp files using the dem2topo freeware (probably another ~ 30 hrs). I expect the whole Missouri project will take several weekends since that's the only time I have to work on it.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 10
×
×
  • Create New...