View Single Post
Old 03-05-2014, 12:40 PM   #23
ohgood
Beastly Adventurer
 
ohgood's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: alabama
Oddometer: 1,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggitter View Post
The thing that worries me about your last post is that these are all rural areas with city streets basically, and my whole goal is getting away from that situation and purposefully going for areas less traveled.

A concern that I realized a couple days ago is that I don't know if map detail vs memory capacity on the phone will be an issue. I assume it's unrealistic to have pretty much the whole state downloaded when one small area was a 29gb file? That was a topo I downloaded and liked, but if there was a non-topo that left out ONLY the topo data I'd prefer it instead.


alabama (entire state) vector based map + contour lines + hillshading = 160Mb total, in three different files, good for about 200ft view on screen
these look GREAT, street names do not pixelate, roads do not blur, it's raster/vector based, super neato stuff.

alabama (entire state) image based (mapnick) = 3.2Gb, in file spread across zoom levels 10-16, good for about 400ft views on screen
these look good, street names and contours will pixelate at higher zoom levels, say 16 x 400% digitally zoomed


alabama, talledega national forrest, image based google terrain = 34Mb zoom levels 10-16
alabama, TNF, image based mapnick = 40Mb zoom levels 10-16
alabama, TNF, image based google satellite view = about 70Mb, 10-16
alabama, TNF, vector based (found on the internets ;-) ) very nice vector based topo maps = 10Mb



there are so many sources for maps, it is incredible to me. i'm finding new sources for vector based maps daily.

i personally have no reservations about heading off a dirt road with just a vector based map to find a campsite where my buddies are already waiting. i may hit every dead end (btdt!) along the way, but that's part of the fun.
__________________
Donkeys are flying
ohgood is offline   Reply With Quote