Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#21

Post by infecto »

bradly wrote: post #16
vvatermelone wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is done at a satellite level nowadays rather than fixed-wing aircraft. Microsoft/Bing did this as well and ended up spinning off their aerial collection division for that same reason, not too long after this article was published. There's just not a huge demand for higher quality imagery by the general public, and those industries who do need higher quality/georeferenced imagery are willing to pay for it.

The screensavers for Apple TV and very manual and really cool how they are made. Everything was planned. The location, exact time/day, sun placement and buildings for lens flares. One of my favorite talks at Apple was on the process to create the ones from space. An incredible amount of work went into pulling those off just for a screen saver.

Do you by chance have a link to that talk?

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#22

Post by jeffbee »

vvatermelone wrote: post #11
bla3 wrote: post #10

2012 Google seemed hungrier and more ambitious than 2022 Google.

This is done at a satellite level nowadays rather than fixed-wing aircraft. Microsoft/Bing did this as well and ended up spinning off their aerial collection division for that same reason, not too long after this article was published. There's just not a huge demand for higher quality imagery by the general public, and those industries who do need higher quality/georeferenced imagery are willing to pay for it.

Are you sure? There's a recent (2020) official Google blog where they state that they use satellite images as a fallback only for places that don't have "an established aerial survey market." It makes sense that aerial images would be more desirable.

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#24

Post by executive »

bellyfullofbac wrote: post #3

The 3d Tokyo website linked here the other day ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21188767 ) also shows you buildings when you zoom in, I'm guessing the guy didn't gather this data himself for such a hobby project, but got it from some governmental survey source. Capable governments should already have that sort of data, e.g. the Swiss one: https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/maps-data-online/maps-geod...

is using Mapbox for this feature.

> https://docs.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl-js/example/3d-buildings/

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#25

Post by tinus_hn »

vvatermelone wrote: post #11
bla3 wrote: post #10

2012 Google seemed hungrier and more ambitious than 2022 Google.

This is done at a satellite level nowadays rather than fixed-wing aircraft. Microsoft/Bing did this as well and ended up spinning off their aerial collection division for that same reason, not too long after this article was published. There's just not a huge demand for higher quality imagery by the general public, and those industries who do need higher quality/georeferenced imagery are willing to pay for it.

The maximum resolution of satellite imagery is about half a meter. That is not due to sensor limitations, it’s because a satellite has to watch through the atmospheric distortion.

Satellite images can’t compete with aerial photography, unless you are trying to photograph an area where you can’t fly, such as in military applications, because in that case there just is no aerial photography.

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#26

Post by reportingsjr »

vvatermelone wrote: post #11
bla3 wrote: post #10

2012 Google seemed hungrier and more ambitious than 2022 Google.

This is done at a satellite level nowadays rather than fixed-wing aircraft. Microsoft/Bing did this as well and ended up spinning off their aerial collection division for that same reason, not too long after this article was published. There's just not a huge demand for higher quality imagery by the general public, and those industries who do need higher quality/georeferenced imagery are willing to pay for it.

Hmm, I'm curious about your first claim! I can't find anything more recent than ~2017[0], but they were still using Airplanes to gather imagery for the 3D maps. I'm pretty sure this is still the case, as urban area resolution is way higher than available non military satellite imagery.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suo_aUTUpps

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#27

Post by DanAtC »

hardly_a_mirage wrote: post #23

Do any of these platforms provide SDKs for integration / other access to their 3D maps? I needed it for a project and couldn't find any.

https://www.nearmap.com/ though they seem to have moved away from flat pricing to "contact us" which is a shame.

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#28

Post by djbebs »

tinus_hn wrote: post #25
vvatermelone wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is done at a satellite level nowadays rather than fixed-wing aircraft. Microsoft/Bing did this as well and ended up spinning off their aerial collection division for that same reason, not too long after this article was published. There's just not a huge demand for higher quality imagery by the general public, and those industries who do need higher quality/georeferenced imagery are willing to pay for it.

The maximum resolution of satellite imagery is about half a meter. That is not due to sensor limitations, it’s because a satellite has to watch through the atmospheric distortion. Satellite images can’t compete with aerial photography, unless you are trying to photograph an area where you can’t fly, such as in military applications, because in that case there just is no aerial photography.

That's not true. We know from trumps "leak" of a satellite photo showing an Iranian missile that there are satellites with resolutions at least as good as 7cm to 10cm

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#29

Post by bradly »

infecto wrote: post #21
bradly wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The screensavers for Apple TV and very manual and really cool how they are made. Everything was planned. The location, exact time/day, sun placement and buildings for lens flares. One of my favorite talks at Apple was on the process to create the ones from space. An incredible amount of work went into pulling those off just for a screen saver.

Do you by chance have a link to that talk?

Unfortunately it was an internal only presentation. Really I had no idea you can basically rent the ISS and the crew in it. They all had to be trained on how to use the special camera system. If I remember correctly it was a custom made RED that has to be sent up in a payload. It was incredible.

Re: Google deploying planes over cities for 3D maps (2012)

#30

Post by tinus_hn »

djbebs wrote: post #28
tinus_hn wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The maximum resolution of satellite imagery is about half a meter. That is not due to sensor limitations, it’s because a satellite has to watch through the atmospheric distortion. Satellite images can’t compete with aerial photography, unless you are trying to photograph an area where you can’t fly, such as in military applications, because in that case there just is no aerial photography.

That's not true. We know from trumps "leak" of a satellite photo showing an Iranian missile that there are satellites with resolutions at least as good as 7cm to 10cm

It is not in fact known that that photo was taken by a satellite, it is only known that around that time a spy satellite was in the sky in the direction of where the photo was taken. But it could also have been taken by other means.

The image is supposedly taken at a pretty big angle, yet shows a pretty much crystal clear image with no atmospheric distortion at all, of a scene in the desert. I’m not convinced. If this were possible, what would be keeping companies from commercializing it?

Here’s an interesting source though for computationally sharpening the images for static scenes:

https://engineering.purdue.edu/ChanGroup/project_turbulence....

Post reply on HN