Is that how the colors of the maps actually looked in 1777? I always assumed that the colors had faded but I never really thought about it until now
Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
51–60 of 72 posts
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#52I dabbled in web-based mapping a couple years ago and found the tech stack to be really quite polished. Starting from a database of features from e.g. OpenStreetMap hosted in a Postgres-based PostGIS map server, and geographical boundaries via special shape files, you can write XML files representing the features you wish to see on each layer of the map (using SQL queries intended for PostGIS), and CSS-like style fil…
QGIS is enormously valuable to those of us who need to do what I would non-authoritatively term "intermediate level geospatial analysis" in jobs that might not have geospatial analysis as part of the official job description, but don't have thousands of dollars available for the ludicrously expensive ArcGIS license.
I find the analysts still need ArcGIS, but on the geospatial software development side I've never run into something I couldn't use QGIS for
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't get it why Google doesn't show forests at >13 zoom. I've read people claim that this makes the map easier to read. But I can't be the only one who orients himself on a map based on boundaries between forests, residential areas, and fields.
Is there a way to make Goog's turn-by-turn to not be street name based but instead give directions like old timers did using landmark navigation? At the old farm house, turn left. After going aways down the road, turn right at by the building with the white archways. Take the next left when you get to the statue of the first mayor.
For full flavor, you'd have to include references to landmarks which no longer exist: "if you pass the vacant lot where the old drugstore used to be, turn around, because you've gone too far."
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
One explanation would be that roads are not the useful information on modern map, you search for you POI or address, and then query an itinerary, and then you have a very contrasty road, the one you need. I suspect just looking at maps to find your way is a more and more cornered case.
I find this quite sad and humorous at the same time. Personally, I'm one that loves looking at maps to familiarize myself with street names in an area of interest rather than the specific route the great Map gods of the cloud have decided for me. I tend to not rely on turn by turn navigation, and actually find it quite annoying with its incessant "in 500ft", "in 400ft", "in 300ft" kind of nagging. Being around people…
My partner relies completely on navigation assistants, but they didn't exist when I learned to drive, and I never bothered to adopt them. What's funny is that I feel just as stressed out trying to drive with the navigator as my partner does without it! I am so used to having a high-level sense of the route, and knowing the scale of the turns and the roads involved, that I feel confused and disoriented if I try to just blindly follow the directions. I'm not very good at blindly following, either - I can't relate the distances given to a real-world sense of scale, so I frequently miss turns. Really funny how different the mental strategies used to solve the same problem can be.
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#55I dabbled in web-based mapping a couple years ago and found the tech stack to be really quite polished. Starting from a database of features from e.g. OpenStreetMap hosted in a Postgres-based PostGIS map server, and geographical boundaries via special shape files, you can write XML files representing the features you wish to see on each layer of the map (using SQL queries intended for PostGIS), and CSS-like style fil…
QGIS is enormously valuable to those of us who need to do what I would non-authoritatively term "intermediate level geospatial analysis" in jobs that might not have geospatial analysis as part of the official job description, but don't have thousands of dollars available for the ludicrously expensive ArcGIS license.
That is such an absurdly specific but accurate description. I used to manage a site that had a lot of geospatial elements, including various custom maps and obscure (outside of the GIS world) data formats like geotiffs or KML or DTED or the WMM. Coming from a non-GIS background and without the need for an expensive solution like ArcGIS, I have no idea how I would have sanity checked any of it without QGIS
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
One explanation would be that roads are not the useful information on modern map, you search for you POI or address, and then query an itinerary, and then you have a very contrasty road, the one you need. I suspect just looking at maps to find your way is a more and more cornered case.
I find this quite sad and humorous at the same time. Personally, I'm one that loves looking at maps to familiarize myself with street names in an area of interest rather than the specific route the great Map gods of the cloud have decided for me. I tend to not rely on turn by turn navigation, and actually find it quite annoying with its incessant "in 500ft", "in 400ft", "in 300ft" kind of nagging. Being around people…
People being that reliant on turn by turn navigation is not just sad, it's also quite dangerous. Any time the navigation app's instructions are wrong, unclear or simply a bit too late, it is quite likely to cause that kind of driver to make a sudden and unsafe maneuver. Having a general familiarity with your planned route and its surroundings before you put the car in gear goes a long way toward preventing those panicked reactions.
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
QGIS is enormously valuable to those of us who need to do what I would non-authoritatively term "intermediate level geospatial analysis" in jobs that might not have geospatial analysis as part of the official job description, but don't have thousands of dollars available for the ludicrously expensive ArcGIS license.
I find the analysts still need ArcGIS, but on the geospatial software development side I've never run into something I couldn't use QGIS for
My current job has pretty low standards for maps in reports, and unfortunately QGIS has a dealbreaker issue: I'd like to just import a basemap, display my data on top, and then export as an image; however, in QGIS the resolution of the basemap scales with the resolution of the export. So, for example, if you want a 300 dpi image, all the city and and street labels (from the basemap) will be microscopic. It's baffling that the software does this, and as a result I have to use ArcMap for these simple maps.
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a way to make Goog's turn-by-turn to not be street name based but instead give directions like old timers did using landmark navigation? At the old farm house, turn left. After going aways down the road, turn right at by the building with the white archways. Take the next left when you get to the statue of the first mayor.
For full flavor, you'd have to include references to landmarks which no longer exist: "if you pass the vacant lot where the old drugstore used to be, turn around, because you've gone too far."
A bit like https://xkcd.com/461/, you mean?
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#59I've always been fascinated by old cartography. How did they even have such precision? Which tools did they have? And how did they store the information?
You might find the retriangulation of Britain in the 1930s and 40s interesting [1]. A network of ~6,500 triangulation pillars (trig points) were built across the country, each of which were in line of sight of at least two other pillars. The pillars each have a mounting point for a theodolite, to allow their position to be calculated from the relative angle and elevation of other visible trig points.
They are often on the top of hills or mountains and so have a warm place in my heart from signifying the high-point of many a hike.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retriangulation_of_Great_Brita...
Re: Using QGIS to apply a 1777 style to today's OpenStreetMap data
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this is ridiculous: https://i.xkqr.org/gmapsvsosm.png The top one is completely unusable if you want to do anything other than drive a car on the highway, in which case it's actually quite good. (I picked this area specifically because it contains highway, railway, footpaths, water, residential area, industrial area, open fields, forest, and wetland. You wouldn't know, though, if you only looked at the top map.…
I really don't get it why Google doesn't show forests at >13 zoom. I've read people claim that this makes the map easier to read. But I can't be the only one who orients himself on a map based on boundaries between forests, residential areas, and fields.
In OsmAnd it displays forest as green areas in low zoom, then only tree pattern in high zoom.