GPS Map Challenge...

[+Ratsneve]

Smith Rock State Park is located in Central Oregon at N 44deg 22' 12.8" by W 121deg 08' 05.8" (approx location of parking turnaround and trailhead).

 

The challege is to take your favorite GPS and with your map program export Smith Rock State Park to your GPS, capture the display with as much terrain detail your map(s) can show, and post the image(s) in this thread only. Please include your GPS make and model and all the map software and overlays you might have used.

 

If this doesn't make sense then don't do it, and I don't expect anyone to actually go to Smith Rock State Park.

 

I'm having trouble justifying the smaller lower resolution screen of the Delorme PN-20 compared to the larger higher resolution Colorado screen I am use too now. I thought seeing the same imagery on different sized screens might help. And I guess I'm assuming the image sizes posted will be actual GPS screen sizes too--don't know if that is possible so you need to include your actual picture screen size.

 

Further discussion could ensue here without showing any images. I might expect photo imagery showing trails from someone with a PN-20 but perhaps a higher topo image showing no trails or features from a Colorado.

Edited August 23, 2008 by Ratsneve

[MtnHermit]

Pick a spot in Wash and you're on. That way I can display Above the Timber's Wash 24K Topos, sorry no Oregon. Do you have a Garmin's NW 24K to compare?

[+Ratsneve]

Pick a spot in Wash and you're on. That way I can display Above the Timber's Wash 24K Topos, sorry no Oregon. Do you have a Garmin's NW 24K to compare?

Okay, I do have Garmin's NW 24K to use and will be using it for Smith Rock in Oregon. I've heard of Above the Timer's or Timberline before. What is it and is it usable on what GPSr's? You know Washington better then I do. I'll let you pick the location you'd like to use and we'll see how I and anyone else can match it. Others can still use Smith Rock State Park or any other entry they'd like to pick now if coordinates are included. After all, this is more than anything for my benefit to see if smaller really can be more useful and more interesting to use and behold. If a city is picked I'll use City Navigator to match...if its topo and in Washington or Oregon I'll use Garmin's new 24K for the Northwest. Otherwise I'll just use the base map topo that came with the CO 400t. The more the merrier--I think.

Edited August 24, 2008 by Ratsneve

[MtnHermit]

Theirs a fundamental problem with this test, screenshots are NOT good representations of how a screen looks in real use. In the case of my Nuvi, their are two layers of touchscreen film which drastically reduce the image intensity. The screenshots simply pickup the pixel color values and place them in a BMP file. Therefore this is more a map test than a screen test.

[+Ratsneve]

Theirs a fundamental problem with this test, screenshots are NOT good representations of how a screen looks in real use. In the case of my Nuvi, their are two layers of touchscreen film which drastically reduce the image intensity. The screenshots simply pickup the pixel color values and place them in a BMP file. Therefore this is more a map test than a screen test.

I agree and go along with that--thanks and noted. A lot of this is focussed on better mapping editing and overlays (I think) that can be done on the smaller screen NP-20 then the basic mapping Garmin gives us on the larger screen'd Colorado and Nuvi. What could turn me away from the Colorado would be if the PN-20, even though on a smaller screen, could present far better mapping detail and interest which I believe is what Delorme is well known for.

 

But I may not really know where this is going to lead and if my thoughts can be better explained away then maybe there is no purpose in the exercise?

Edited August 24, 2008 by Ratsneve

[MtnHermit]

So here's a sample of Above the Timber's Washington 24K Topos so you can compare map sizes. I picked this for the red dashed trail and forest lands and wilderness are shown in different colors.

 

The first is the eTrex, identical in size to the PN-20. You can read the exact location off the screen.

 

 

The Nuvi is significantly larger at the same 800' scale as the eTrex.

 

 

The Nuvi's DEM shaded basemap. See the bump in I-90, just left of the cursor, Snow lake is above the bump.

 

 

Finally Mapsource for reference.

 

 

A CO/OR screenshot using Garmin's NW 24K Topos would compliment these images.

[+benjamin921]

Gimme some time

[+benjamin921]

Well, I do not have the Western Topo Data on my laptop right now so I went to the Oregon State web page to download some free aerial imagery (cir 2005), just a small aera. I then put this into XMap 5.2 ($99 for PN-xx owners and well worth the extra $). I'll try and get the regular Topo data later unless (ehhmm..Max, Slim) someone else beats me to it

Also, as stated above, until you actually see it first hand, you really shouldn't pass judgment yet These look really good, IMHO, but even better while you are actually looking at it in your hand - same goes for the Topo Data.

 

First shot of a parking area (not quite on your coords but..) - resized. The next two ae non-resized screen captures.

 

 

 

 

Another shot, different area.

 

 

 

And another.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2008 by benjamin921

[MtnHermit]

Can the PN-20/40 create screenshots internal to the unit? or must you use an external program like xImage?

If internal, to the flash card? or internal memory?

 

Thanks

[+benjamin921]

For now the screenshots go on the SD card.

[+embra]

This is a great idea. I like to see the comparisons.

 

To start, here's a shot of the Snow Lake, WA area from the Topo7 map program (I'll get some PN-20 screenshots to follow). I note that the Topo7 data lacks some of the smaller water things (streams, ponds) that Mapsource has. This is consistent with my use of Topo7; I use the USGS maps when I need better data for that stuff. I don't have any USGS data for this area, though.

 

[+embra]

Here are some screen captures from the PN-20. It looks to me like the .25 mi scale is most comparable in terms of coverage to MtnHermit's eTrex capture.

 

[+embra]

And to try and match up with Ben's shots of Smith Rock SP...

 

First, the Topo7 screen shot. I note there is no trail data here:

 

 

Then some PN-20 screen captures using Topo7 data of the areas Ben displayed:

 

 

[+RRLover]

experiment, I don't ever post images till (maybe) now. -----------

 

 

Norm

Edited August 25, 2008 by RRLover

[+RRLover]

In Topo 7, can you select specific contour spacing for specific zoom levels

while cutting maps for export to PN-X0?

 

<edit> I believe that to have been possible w/ MMO for Magellans,

but that's foggy now, and that road's been overtaken by brambles.

<end edit>

 

Norm

Edited August 25, 2008 by RRLover

[+embra]

Since there wasn't any trail data for the T7 Smith Rock SP shots, I downloaded the pdf of the park map from the Oregon SP web page. I took a screen shot of the pdf and saved it as a jpg, then imported and registered the jpg in XMap.

 

The quality of the jpg I captured was rather poor, but it was sufficient to serve as a template to trace the trails with a draw tool in XMap. I then removed the registered jpg image and cut some maps. Results below.

 

Note in these examples I elected to save as a draw layer. I like to use a color that stands out. Draw layers have the advantage that they can be toggled on or off on the GPS display. I could have copied to the active track layer to make them routable trails (currently trail routes have to be created on computer and transferred to the PN).

 

XMap screen shot:

 

 

PN-20 screen captures:

 

[+embra]

In Topo 7, can you select specific contour spacing for specific zoom levels

while cutting maps for export to PN-X0?

 

<edit> I believe that to have been possible w/ MMO for Magellans,

but that's foggy now, and that road's been overtaken by brambles.

<end edit>

You can't set them for different levels. However, T7 does allow you to set the display for low, medium, or high detail levels on the computer. Low is every 40 feet, medium (the default) every 20 feet, and high every 10 feet.

 

When the detail maps are cut, this will carry over to the GPS, but there's some hard coding somewhere that makes the determination of what intervals to use at various zoom levels. The closest zoom levels should correspond to the detail level you choose.

[+RRLover]

embra :

 

What about XMap, would it allow for surveying a, say, 3 acre field with undulating terrain

and show similar to one foot contour spacing?

Plastic bunnies shouldn't fly, and no high-speed tunneling allowed.

 

I'd like to 'lay-out' several course plans for a given field to be used at different times for

various Lure Coursing events. To do so from the comfort of home would make the task

less of a challenge; requiring less marching around, and edits prior to an event.

 

Norm

 

<It would seem that post-processing software/hardware will be/would have been required . . . SIGH!>

 

No virtual field set-up in the immediate future for me. The old way will still work . . . in the fall . . . when it's raining . . . and cold . . . and dark.

Edited August 25, 2008 by RRLover

[MtnHermit]

Here are some screen captures from the PN-20. It looks to me like the .25 mi scale is most comparable in terms of coverage to MtnHermit's eTrex capture.

 

 

 

Thanks for the PN-20 screenshots. I'm curious, in looking at the cursor, I don't see vector objects (points, lines, polygons) being identified. Does the PN-20 NOT do this?

 

In the case of the eTrex, every object you see can be IDed using the cursor. That feature is particularly useful to ID a contour elevation. In the above screenshot the lake is IDed, first as a pop up, then after ~5 sec only the status line remains, very top.

[MtnHermit]

Since there wasn't any trail data for the T7 Smith Rock SP shots, I downloaded the pdf of the park map from the Oregon SP web page. I took a screen shot of the pdf and saved it as a jpg, then imported and registered the jpg in XMap.

 

The quality of the jpg I captured was rather poor, but it was sufficient to serve as a template to trace the trails with a draw tool in XMap. I then removed the registered jpg image and cut some maps. Results below.

 

Note in these examples I elected to save as a draw layer. I like to use a color that stands out. Draw layers have the advantage that they can be toggled on or off on the GPS display. I could have copied to the active track layer to make them routable trails (currently trail routes have to be created on computer and transferred to the PN).

 

PN-20 screen captures:

 

I'm very impressed. First because that you could at all, then for the process and apparent ease with which you made the trails. Kudos.

 

I prefer your red dashed trails to the default Delorme trails too.

[+Ratsneve]

Well, I do not have the Western Topo Data on my laptop right now so I went to the Oregon State web page to download some free aerial imagery (cir 2005), just a small aera. I then put this into XMap 5.2 ($99 for PN-xx owners and well worth the extra $). I'll try and get the regular Topo data later unless (ehhmm..Max, Slim) someone else beats me to it

Also, as stated above, until you actually see it first hand, you really shouldn't pass judgment yet These look really good, IMHO, but even better while you are actually looking at it in your hand - same goes for the Topo Data.

Interesting captures from the PN-20. So when you use photos especially and zoom in you can zoom to far and get a blur but usually that is going further with the zoom then you need? What about when pinpointing a geocache? When you got close to a cache would you switch to a different map style when you need to zoom in all the way? Smith Rock has steep areas that are shaded. If you needed trails and details in the shaded areas what would you do--add a transparent overlay of countours and trails from some other map source data?

 

Looking at your shots is terrific but as you keep cautioning seeing the actual PN-20 screen is the only way to get the proof of the pudding.

 

The question is...can any of this sort of mapping be done on the Colorado/Oregon too? I'm pretty sure not from Garmin or MapSource but are the Garmin GPSr's limited to only Garmin mapping?

[+Ratsneve]

And to try and match up with Ben's shots of Smith Rock SP...

Interesting shots of the two areas on the PN-20. Does Topo7 come with the PN-20? What mapping and tools come with the PN-20? Well, I know, I could look couldn't I.

[MtnHermit]

experiment, I don't ever post images till (maybe) now. -----------

 

The eTrex 800' image is showing 40' contours, I believe the 640' PN-20 is only showing 200' contours. Is this correct?

 

Also, the trail shows many switchbacks, not so on the Topo7 map. When you hike a trail with switchbacks, what does a typical tracklog show? Is their good agreement between the trail and track?

[+Ratsneve]

experiment, I don't ever post images till (maybe) now. -----------

 

 

Norm

Um... What is the map source for your PN-20 shots? And I notice that the top picture says mapsource in the lower left but this isn't at all related to Garmin's MapSource is it?

 

Remember you are dealing with a newbie who bought a Colorado and hasn't learned what she can do with its maps yet--if anything. ...but I'll post Colorado shots soon all the same.

 

Is it confirmed then by anyone that Garmin's Colorado/Oregon (MapSource) does not have the tools or alternate maps to do these trail overlays that the NP-20 can do with such apparent ease?

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[MtnHermit]

Um... What is the map source for your PN-20 shots? And I notice that the top picture says mapsource in the lower left but this isn't at all related to Garmin's MapSource is it. Remember you are dealing with a newbie who bought a Colorado and hasn't learned what she can really do with it yet--if anything. ...but I'll post Colorado shots soon all the same.

Your behind in your reading, see here, must have been out playing all day.

[+RRLover]

I just grabbed the images from above posts and attempted to place for an easier A/B comparison.

 

Norm

Edited August 25, 2008 by RRLover

[+Ratsneve]

Um... What is the map source for your PN-20 shots? And I notice that the top picture says mapsource in the lower left but this isn't at all related to Garmin's MapSource is it. Remember you are dealing with a newbie who bought a Colorado and hasn't learned what she can really do with it yet--if anything. ...but I'll post Colorado shots soon all the same.

Your behind in your reading, see here, must have been out playing all day.

No...well...probably. But if I can make it confusing for me I will make it so.

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+embra]

What about XMap, would it allow for surveying a, say, 3 acre field with undulating terrain

and show similar to one foot contour spacing?

 

I'm not sure about this one, Norm. XMap not only has the low/medium/high contour settings, but also allows for custom settings for each zoom level you care to set them for. I'm not sure that I understand how to set them, though...this is the first time I've ever looked at it, and I'm getting blanks for those close-zoomed areas when I try to go for 1 or 5 foot intervals.

 

I may need to punt to Benjamin or Chip on this one. I'll try to play with it and see if I can figure it out in the meantime. It *seems* like this should be possible.

 

Edit: Actually, if you post this in the XMap Pro section at the Delorme boards, one of the XMap gurus will be able to answer definitively.

Edited August 25, 2008 by embra

[+embra]

 

Thanks for the PN-20 screenshots. I'm curious, in looking at the cursor, I don't see vector objects (points, lines, polygons) being identified. Does the PN-20 NOT do this?

 

The lower left-hand corner is showing the object the cursor is pointing to; in the left-most shot it's the trail, in the right-most it's an elevation, and the middle ones are the lake.

 

When the cursor is showing current position, the topo display runs all the way to the top of the screen. If the cursor is moved, then the coords, bearing, and distance from position is show. Oregon is a couple thousand miles from where I am.

[+RRLover]

Recalling and re-researching, I think that to get the type of terrain resolution that I'm

really interested in for what I would like to accomplish, would require post-processing,

something that "it would seem" DeLorme may be moving away from, and tends to get

expen$ive, both in hard/softwares, & effort to get all the samples (stations).

I would still like to have input from those "in the know", though.

 

Thank-you,

Norm

Edited August 25, 2008 by RRLover

[+embra]

The eTrex 800' image is showing 40' contours, I believe the 640' PN-20 is only showing 200' contours. Is this correct?

 

Also, the trail shows many switchbacks, not so on the Topo7 map. When you hike a trail with switchbacks, what does a typical tracklog show? Is their good agreement between the trail and track?

Moving my cursor around I can see that those shots are displaying 100' contour intervals at 640' and 20' at 320'. If a detail map was cut at high detail level, those intervals should be halved.

 

I have seen that the T7 trail data is simplified; it's not to often--and only in the steepest areas--that any semblance of switchbacks are represented. I meant to comment above that the more I see Mapsource topo maps, I gain more appreciation for the trail data they include. All of them are incomplete, of course, but Magellan maps were particularly woeful in their trail data.

[+embra]

Interesting captures from the PN-20. So when you use photos especially and zoom in you can zoom to far and get a blur but usually that is going further with the zoom then you need? What about when pinpointing a geocache? When you got close to a cache would you switch to a different map style when you need to zoom in all the way? Smith Rock has steep areas that are shaded. If you needed trails and details in the shaded areas what would you do--add a transparent overlay of countours and trails from some other map source data?

The blurring at over-zoomed levels will be common for any rasterized (scanned) images. It's just like putting a magnifying glass or microscope on a photgraph--the integrity of the image breaks up and you start to see things like ink spots or pixels. Also, the rasterized detail maps take a *lot* of memory.

 

The Topo7 data itself (not things like the satellite images or the USGS maps) is vectorized, meaning it is reconstructed specifically for the zoom level. It's more efficient for memory management, and it allows crisp images at extreme zoom levels.

 

Does Topo7 come with the PN-20? What mapping and tools come with the PN-20? Well, I know, I could look couldn't I.

 

I do know the answer. The PN-20 and PN-40 are bundled with the Topo7 software. Other imagery is extra; XMap Professional is available to PN owners at half-price ($99).

 

As far as the tools included in Topo7, you'd best check the Delorme website.

[+Ratsneve]

The lower left-hand corner is showing the object the cursor is pointing to; in the left-most shot it's the trail, in the right-most it's an elevation, and the middle ones are the lake.

 

When the cursor is showing current position, the topo display runs all the way to the top of the screen. If the cursor is moved, then the coords, bearing, and distance from position is show. Oregon is a couple thousand miles from where I am.

BTW, just how easy is it to navigate that pointer around the PN-20 screen? You may or may not know that the pointer on the Colorado isn't so much fun to move around--Garmin should redesign it so there isn't so much tendancy to push down (click) and almost ruin the whole affair.

[+Ratsneve]

I do know the answer. The PN-20 and PN-40 are bundled with the Topo7 software. Other imagery is extra; XMap Professional is available to PN owners at half-price ($99).

So if you buy the PN-40 you'd be pretty much set for topo off road stuff which currently does not auto-route but might one day soon with a software update. For city driving and auto-routing one would buy Street Atlas U.S.A.? Okay, I just got back from the website link. It looks like Topo7 does it all. Dadgum [ ], this is pretty much clinching it for me. When you see my Snow Lake and Smith Rock shots there isn't much to write home about except the larger screen. I'm bailing out of Garmin one way or the other and waiting for the PN-40 to gel--I may not bail for 3 months--whatever it takes.

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+Ratsneve]

Here are my results for Snow Lake and Smith Rock. Note that I could not find Snow Lake by the normal search--I tried several different ways/categories with no luck... So I navigated brute force thanks to the I-90 shot and instructions included--thanks. During the navigation it took a long time--sometimes over a minute to draw to the new location. It also isn't real easy using the Rock-n-Roller on the Colorado as a joystick--to much pressue down and you click the 'enter' function of this multi-control. The actual screen size of the Colorado is 1.5" (close enough) wide x 2.5" high and its 240 x 400 pixels. It is a backlit color TFT. All the shots used Garmin's Topo U.S. 24 K - Northwest MicroSD. The pointer moved over a map feature describes that feature for ~ 5 seconds then the name disappears. Did I mention you have to be patient sometimes moving the pointer around? I think this challenge and maybe some other recent threads are instrumental in my acceptance that size isn't as important as content and design.

 

Here are Snow Lake shots. Note the trails. Trails may be the nicest part of these 24K topos? Note that Smith Rock has trails too but for some reason they don't show up in the 24K topo--I was disappointed to see this; and Topo7 didn't have trails either...but look how 'embra' solved that! Amazing. Smith Rock trails have been around a long time but maybe the topo sources are even older?

 

 

And here are Smith Rock shots. Benjamin921's photo shots were noteworthy of the PN-20 too.

 

 

Now let's see what these look like? I wonder how I can get these laid out better on the page...3 across and 4 across with a little gap between. If someone posted the code example I'll give it another edit try. Thanks. Ha! I figured it out.

 

What do you think of Garmin's 24K topos? I think I want a PN-40 for numerous reasons. But, regardless, I won't be the first to buy one--I must have learned something from this experience--maybe not.

 

The only thing remaining I think would be if a Garmin mapping pro would come along and add trails to Smith Rock or use photos with trails deliniated batter for the Colorado/Oregon use but so far those GPSr's have shown no interest in this challenge.

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+Ratsneve]

Well, I do not have the Western Topo Data on my laptop right now so I went to the Oregon State web page to download some free aerial imagery (cir 2005), just a small aera. I then put this into XMap 5.2 ($99 for PN-xx owners and well worth the extra $). I'll try and get the regular Topo data later unless (ehhmm..Max, Slim) someone else beats me to it

Also, as stated above, until you actually see it first hand, you really shouldn't pass judgment yet These look really good, IMHO, but even better while you are actually looking at it in your hand - same goes for the Topo Data.

Could you (one) take embra's trail overlay and size it up and add it on top of this photo so the trails would more easily show up...especially for the shaded areas? Could the shaded areas be lightened up so they wouldn't look so contrasty?

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[MtnHermit]

Here are Snow Lake shots. Note the trails. Trails may be the nicest part of these 24K topos?

 

 

 

 

While theirs a lot of trail detail, the thin white line is very faint. Is it possible to turn off the DEM shading? These are awfully dark. Contours are very hard to see. How do you find map reading in the field?

 

Both the Garmin and Above the Timber maps show the trail going through the obvious saddle, whereas the T7 map has the trail 200' above the saddle. The T7 maps also appears to misname the wilderness.

 

Of note, because of the many more and smaller pixels of the CO, when pixel mapped to the PC screen, the CO screen appears much larger than in real life.

Edited August 25, 2008 by MtnHermit

[MtnHermit]

Moving my cursor around I can see that those shots are displaying 100' contour intervals at 640' and 20' at 320'. If a detail map was cut at high detail level, those intervals should be halved.

The T7 maps have more levels of detail than Above the Timber's maps. Its not possible to display 100' contours, only 40' and 200' intervals. At a given scale, more or less detail is possible, but still not 100' contours.

 

I have seen that the T7 trail data is simplified; it's not to often--and only in the steepest areas--that any semblance of switchbacks are represented. I meant to comment above that the more I see Mapsource topo maps, I gain more appreciation for the trail data they include. All of them are incomplete, of course, but Magellan maps were particularly woeful in their trail data.

I think you're a bit confused with regard to Mapsource. Mapsource is Garmin's map viewer, whereas the maps I showed were published by Above the Timber, not Garmin.

 

Here's a screenshot off of Above the Timber's website:

 

BTW, your previous post cleared up the vector detail cursor question, lower left.

[MtnHermit]

Is it confirmed then by anyone that Garmin's Colorado/Oregon (MapSource) does not have the tools or alternate maps to do these trail overlays that the NP-20 can do with such apparent ease?

I believe both the CO/OR will display georeferenced satellite photos, but not as topo overlays. It's either the topo or the photo, not both.

 

The PN-20 is quite impressive in this regard.

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

I believe both the CO/OR will display georeferenced satellite photos

 

This feature only applies to some pre-loaded imagery on the marine units.

 

C'mon hackers, I know you can find a way for us to load our own!

[+embra]

I have seen that the T7 trail data is simplified; it's not to often--and only in the steepest areas--that any semblance of switchbacks are represented. I meant to comment above that the more I see Mapsource topo maps, I gain more appreciation for the trail data they include. All of them are incomplete, of course, but Magellan maps were particularly woeful in their trail data.

I think you're a bit confused with regard to Mapsource. Mapsource is Garmin's map viewer, whereas the maps I showed were published by Above the Timber, not Garmin.

I often *am* [more than] a bit confused --and by the time I made that comment, I think I had lost sight of the fact that you were using Above The Timber data. But in the referenced Mapsource screen shot you originally posted up above, wasn't that Garmin data? It looks like it has all the trail data that T7 and ATT have, and it seems to show some switchbacks.

 

If that was just ATT data viewed in mapsource, then I'd still stand by the comment, though this wouldn't serve as any supporting evidence. But my recollection is that I've been surprised sometimes by how many trails Garmin topo data includes.

[+coggins]

I believe both the CO/OR will display georeferenced satellite photos

 

This feature only applies to some pre-loaded imagery on the marine units.

 

C'mon hackers, I know you can find a way for us to load our own!

MapWel is said to work with the Colorado series, Moagu not, but with others. BMap2MP also has some handy features. One of these with the switchbacks.com trail maps might be of use.

Edited August 25, 2008 by coggins

[+Ratsneve]

While theirs a lot of trail detail, the thin white line is very faint. Is it possible to turn off the DEM shading? These are awfully dark. Contours are very hard to see. How do you find map reading in the field?

 

Both the Garmin and Above the Timber maps show the trail going through the obvious saddle, whereas the T7 map has the trail 200' above the saddle. The T7 maps also appears to misname the wilderness.

 

Of note, because of the many more and smaller pixels of the CO, when pixel mapped to the PC screen, the CO screen appears much larger than in real life.

I'm pretty sure I can turn off the shading and will work on that today for Snow Lake and Smith Rock and another state park nearby that has trails. Wish I had left a waypoint marker at Snow Lake.

 

Don't know what to make of the apparent T7 trail location error.

 

>>>>>Knowing for example that a trail was mislocated on the T7 map, can it be corrected on an overlay that then shows the correct trail routing? _And_ can this correction then be left on one's T7 as a permanent change or must one forever juggle overlays? Surely there is danger doing this as T7 will one day be revised and you would lose your corrections? Oh well...for all I know there are better tricks already for tracking this sort of thing?

^^^^^

 

I suppose the larger screens offer this minor advantage? I've found only one local source so far for the PN-20 and they needed to charge up the battery in the unit which was dead. I'll go by again for a hands-on look and feel of an active screen though the salespeople there are clearly more partial to Garmin then Delorme.

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+Ratsneve]

BTW, I'm sorry this isn't exactly relative to the Challenge here but I am the op and you are all PN-20 folk. One issue I've had with the Colorado and it is true for the Oregon too is that some data cannot be cleared or reset directly from the GPSr. Geocaches once found and finished with cannot be deleted from the GPSr. On the Oregon you can reset the trip mileage but there is no way to reset the total odometer mileage. Some of these things can be deleted/removed by hooking up to the PC and deleting certain files directly. I think this is cumbersome and the wrong approach.

 

How does the PN-20 deal with these issues? I hope wherever data is taken or created there is a means from the PN-20/40 to reset or clear or delete them?

 

Also, is there any way by chance to lock a waypoint you create so that if one had created 50 waypoints but had 6 you wanted to keep you could lock those 6 and delete the others globally? Otherwise, like now on the Colorado, in order to keep a few waypoints one must delete all the others individually--takes time.

 

Thanks.

[+embra]

Don't know what to make of the apparent T7 trail location error.

 

>>>>>Knowing for example that a trail was mislocated on the T7 map, can it be corrected on an overlay that then shows the correct trail routing? _And_ can this correction then be left on one's T7 as a permanent change or must one forever juggle overlays? Surely there is danger doing this as T7 will one day be revised and you would lose your corrections? Oh well...for all I know there are better tricks already for tracking this sort of thing?

^^^^^

 

It makes me suspect that much of the trail data was drawn in on the T7 maps, and should be regarded as approximate. Functionally it works for me; I just expect there to be a trail somewhere in the vicinity. More accurate is better, but since I regard the GPS as a navigation aid that I don't rely upon completely (e.g., I always bring paper maps for any extended hiking or in territory I don't know well), it doesn't cause me problems.

 

One way that it *can* cause problems is if people use it for trail routes...the oversimplified route can lead to an unrealistically optimistic arrival time that doesn't take into account that there's a longer distance to cover than the more or less straight line indicates (take a look at this example). This is usually a matter of experience; I know to add time to what the PN-20 shows, but someone new and overly trusting of the instrument might make a bad decision (kinda like that guy who turned onto the railroad track because the GPS told him to.)

 

If it's important to you, you can make corrections in the form of addtions to your own maps similar to what I illustrated above. You cannot "erase" existing mistakes in the trail layer. You *can* submit corrections to Delorme for updates to their database, but that can take a year or two or three to get back to you in the form of a correction.

 

Bottom line for me is that it's less than ideal, but I don't see it as any big deal. I may be guilty of rationalization in this judgment.

[+embra]

How does the PN-20 deal with these issues? I hope wherever data is taken or created there is a means from the PN-20/40 to reset or clear or delete them?

 

Also, is there any way by chance to lock a waypoint you create so that if one had created 50 waypoints but had 6 you wanted to keep you could lock those 6 and delete the others globally? Otherwise, like now on the Colorado, in order to keep a few waypoints one must delete all the others individually--takes time.

 

You can delete all waypoints or individual waypoints. You can also delete by symbol (the best way to distinguish found caches at present is to change the symbol). This would probably be the best way to afford protection to waypoints you want to retain. But there is no way to lock waypoints directly so as to protect them from deletion.

 

My practice usually is to do delete all waypoints and send over a fresh batch of the waypoints I want. So I guess you would say I'm protecting the ones I want to save on the computer.

 

As for the trip odometer and related info fields, all can be cleared and reset on the GPS. You can clear values for Trip Values, Speeds, Elevations, and/or Device Odometer.

[Grasscatcher]

This partial quote came from the OP's initial entry....

 

"If this doesn't make sense then don't do it, and I don't expect anyone to actually go to Smith Rock State Park."

 

You guys are comparing the accuracy of map after map and noting omissions etc.,all the time knowing that no map is perfect.

 

Here's another perspective........

The main omission is that you are missing the fun of actually being "out there" walking the actual trail and logging it on your GPS and then coming back and downloading/plotting the data onto whatever run of the mill map is available. That way,now you really have something.

When you zoom in to see the actual switchback data you'll remember exactly how many times you had to "stop and let your eyes get uncrossed" or to let your heart get back into your chest, or exactly where it was that you saw a big pile of bear poop with little bells and a pepper spray container lid in it.....Ha!

 

Then I'm satisfied as long as I have any old map that has basic and general reference data on my GPS. Back at home, I can add the specific and actual trail data, and will have enjoyed every minute of gathering, and having the most accurate trail maps.

The absolute best or "top quality" maps are really of marginal benefit over general reference data on a 2" screen. (just my opinion)

What is really impressive is when you can come back home and display your accurate "actual" trail data on a big high resolution raster map or big computer monitor.

Edited August 25, 2008 by Grasscatcher

[+Ratsneve]

It makes me suspect that much of the trail data was drawn in on the T7 maps, and should be regarded as approximate. Functionally it works for me; I just expect there to be a trail somewhere in the vicinity. More accurate is better, but since I regard the GPS as a navigation aid that I don't rely upon completely (e.g., I always bring paper maps for any extended hiking or in territory I don't know well), it doesn't cause me problems.

 

One way that it *can* cause problems is if people use it for trail routes...the oversimplified route can lead to an unrealistically optimistic arrival time that doesn't take into account that there's a longer distance to cover than the more or less straight line indicates (take a look at this example). This is usually a matter of experience; I know to add time to what the PN-20 shows, but someone new and overly trusting of the instrument might make a bad decision (kinda like that guy who turned onto the railroad track because the GPS told him to.)

 

If it's important to you, you can make corrections in the form of addtions to your own maps similar to what I illustrated above. You cannot "erase" existing mistakes in the trail layer. You *can* submit corrections to Delorme for updates to their database, but that can take a year or two or three to get back to you in the form of a correction.

 

Bottom line for me is that it's less than ideal, but I don't see it as any big deal. I may be guilty of rationalization in this judgment.

I think it is a big deal, ignoring switchbacks. Especially if your a map company priding yourself in providing accurate maps. So someone at Delorme decided it would be quicker to draw a trail from a topo by averaging it? Very disappointing. Are there any other examples? How about Franklin Pass (long long time ago) out of Mineral King I think? Does it show averaged or show all its switchbacks. I think the difference would be much more then 20%. I could take a look at the Colorado 400t's base topo map.

Edited August 25, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+embra]

I think it is a big deal, ignoring switchbacks.

 

Different strokes for different folks!

 

As Grasscatcher pointed out, there's no perfect solution. The art of finding what works best for you is to weigh the pros and cons and make the best informed choice you can.

[+Ratsneve]

I think it is a big deal, ignoring switchbacks.

 

Different strokes for different folks!

 

As Grasscatcher pointed out, there's no perfect solution. The art of finding what works best for you is to weigh the pros and cons and make the best informed choice you can.

I just think we are dismissing the "why" this is way to soon but you guys should know.

 

On another note I turned off shading and visited Snow Lake and Smith Rock. It makes only a little difference on the Colorado screen. I would much rather turn it back on.

 

But while searching for Mineral King looking for Franklin Pass the Colorado switched off deciding it had had enough of me. Trying to turn it on again results in "System Software Missing" and a weird state is entered into until a cell is removed. This is not good. I think I'm finished with this thread and the Colorado and the PN-40 for a while now. Time to visit Mineral King and ride up into the Sierra's again without any GPS.