Currently some overall comment about projects but would be a place for mappers, terms of engagement, estimates, payment, fieldwork and drawing time. And not forgetting managing volunteer projects.
MT: Tane Cambridge Posted: 14 January 2009, 10:28 AM
The original notes for field work for the Naseby map have been lost from the OCAD map file (or maybe never put into it) I was going to mention on the map the original map work but I couldnt remember the name. The only place I knew where to find it (in a hurry!) was on an original map somewhere in the pile of YODA maps that is I think somewhere in the pile of papers in my brothers room!
Significant areas of used of the map had been largely updated by Carsten for the Otago Champs (middle and sprint) last year.
MT: Michael Posted: 14 January 2009, 1:36 AM
The Naseby maps mention fieldwork by Michael Wood and Carsten Joergensen, without paying tribute to the original mapping by Kjell Melander for APOC 1984. This original work was outstanding, and the depiction for 1:15,000 of some of NZ's most complex terrain has made things much easier for later updaters.
Those who have puzzled over the 1988 edition may be surprised at this statement, but the map picked up many errors after Melander and a couple of associates returned to do a revision and extension. I suspect the later cartography which was done by a non-orienteering organisation; and misinterpretations when inputting to OCAD.
MT: Paul I Posted: 4 August 2009, 11:33 PM
I'm not really sure what our average hours of fieldwork per sq km is in this country, I think on a really easy map it's probably 30hrs, and just roughly I think the toughest maps are around the 100hrs per sq km (like b-hills and some parts of white lightning from memory) so I nearly fell off my chair when I spotted some mapping info at the 2009 Croatian Championships in Kaast terrain where the average map requires around 30 days per sq km! I thought I rush through fieldwork a little as I always keep the club budget in mind. Next time I'll take my bbq.
MT: Michael Posted: 5 August 2009, 8:48 AM
I used to record speeds of 15-50hrs/sq.km (with a reasonable basemap). Plus 40-60% drawing. But as the easy areas close to population get used up, there's a demand for working with poor, or no, basemap. For coastal sand-dunes with that awkward fringe between forest and open and no basemap, I've recorded 200hrs/sq.km. The drawing goes up too as you have to do two or three passes, so still around 50%. I gather some of the Europeans find it hard to get photogrammetry; maybe Croatia.
MT: Michael Posted: 17 February 2012, 9:02 PM
Non-technical interlude. I think you'll enjoy looking at www.organisedgrime.com.au
MT: MikeB Posted: 28 October 2014, 10:17 AM
Paul you must have felt like a mountain goat at times out at Kawakawa Bay particularly in the native bush. I'd be interested to know who long it all took to fieldwork and how good were the contours from Stewart. The farmland was probably ok but the native often leaves a lot to be desired. Did you use a GPS at all?
MT: Martin Posted: 28 October 2014, 10:53 AM
Hi Mike, the base contours were from Lidar
MT: MikeB Posted: 28 October 2014, 11:52 AM
Off the GIS site or were they more specific from the council. The GIS off the their website are generally more smoothed and would hard work on that terrain, I would imagine.
Great to have a new physically challenging area.
MT: Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 12:04 PM
Will try to answer your questions Mike.. Martin supplied the ocad generated Lidar at 5m. It was fairly good at showing wiggles both in the farmland and in the native, however it was still a challenge to sort out right from wrong and give them better shape. The native bush was worse but would be significantly better than photogrammetry would have been in the dense canopy. You can see a little of the lidar on the section with 'Not Mapped' printed on. At least these contours were generally correct. Having Geo photos to overlay can be a great help also. If these are high res then it's fantastic. Currently working on a very complex map containing some Karst Limestone terrain where there was no lidar available. Stewart has done a great job with photogrammetry but it is still pretty hard work making it accurate and then adding stuff. Lidar/photos would probably have been much easier. This is partially/possibly because Stewarts base aerials were flown at a higher 25000ft. Sometimes at lower altitudes his work is perfect. I have to say some of the terrain the current project is really fantastic - book a date in for next years Nationals NOW everybody!
I hope everyone coped with mentally Kawakawa's slopes. I was very nervous about people experience, only knowing the were interesting bits of the map that would add some spice here and there. The block of mixed native and teatree was a huge mission, at first I didn't want to do it but persevered. It required painstaking work to make it usable, and the photos on this part were very poor. Hope everyone is ok now it's over. There are some pines that weren't used which are quite nice for next time? Looking at the maps online it seems like the printing was very fuzzy, seems such as shame if so. Is it also something to do with printing on waterproof paper? I think we should have some sort of log where map printing info on settings and results could be logged for future reference. Personally I'm not a huge fan of waterproof paper and would rather use proper 'white' combined with a good thicker plastic bag. I can't imagine it was the paper that was the cause of the fuzz though, if that was the case.
Someone please stop the rain as unlike Bryan I have had much luck field working in it, unless it's easy and you never have to rub stuff out.
MT: MikeB Posted: 28 October 2014, 12:59 PM
I didn't envy you the task while I was out there. Native can be extremely frustrating and can take hours and hours to get it anywhere near right. Throw in the steepness it could be your worst nightmare. The aerial photos on the Alggi site look really good though, they must have been a huge help. The farmland areas looked very clean and crisp when I looked on the website. You can almost see the individual sheep tracks in those really steep gullies.
The printing was discussed briefly at the controllers clinic yesterday. It was felt the paper may have been part of the problem although the Kawakawa Bay map was definitely worse with the colours a lot more faded and fuzzy than the sprint and middle maps and all were printed on waterproof paper. Waterproof is not so bad if it's forest and mainly white. We used offset rather than digital in the World Masters in 2000 on waterproof and it was fine so digital printing could be a large part of the problem as well.
Test prints before can alleviate issues. If you remember that's what we did for the nationals NW held a few of years ago. So the idea of some sort of log with paper quality, colours, printing settings and results is a good one.
MT: Paul I Posted: 28 October 2014, 1:20 PM
Some of the alggi photos were amazing but I didn't use them for contours that much because they were too detailed and showed stuff that shouldn't be on the map (too small), and out the back the photos were terrible for the vegetation where I needed it most.