[OSM-dev] Scale of downloaded images seems to vary.

Tom Hughes tom at compton.nu
Thu Jan 11 08:52:06 UTC 2018


Actually isn't the real problem here just needing to know what DPI is 
being being assumed by mapnik when rendering?

IIRC it's 96dpi?

Tom

On 11/01/18 08:50, Tom Hughes wrote:
> Please don't - it has nothing to do with the web site code.
> 
> Please go and read about projections instead.
> 
> Tom
> 
> On 11/01/18 08:21, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As long as there is nobody on the list can make sense of the values 
>> for almost two weeks, I'd say it should be considered a bug and filed 
>> towards https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues
>>
>> чт, 11 янв. 2018 г. в 2:05, Bjoern Hassler <bjohas+mw at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:bjohas%2Bmw at gmail.com>>:
>>
>>     Dear friends,
>>
>>     I was just wondering whether anybody else had any thoughts on this?
>>     Any tips on making sense of the mapnik_scale would be greatly
>>     appreciated!
>>
>>     Bjoern
>>
>>     On 3 January 2018 at 17:21, Bjoern Hassler <bjohas+mw at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:bjohas+mw at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi Bryan, hi Darafei,
>>
>>         That's helpful, thanks. So we know that the calculation from the
>>         bbox is correct.
>>
>>         However, I guess we don't know about how pixels translate to
>>         real-word dims? (Or, equicvalenly, how pixels relate to the
>>         lat-lon extent.)
>>
>>         Thanks!
>>         Bjoern
>>
>>         On 2 January 2018 at 14:46, Bryan Housel <bryan at 7thposition.com
>>         <mailto:bryan at 7thposition.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             Bjoern, maybe the geo functions used in iD might be a
>>             helpful reference:
>>             
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/blob/master/modules/geo/geo.js
>>
>>             The numbers I got from comparing the bbox sizes are pretty
>>             close to your numbers.
>>
>>
>>             bbox1 = [[24.123255,49.250507], [24.234286,49.367924]]
>>
>>             dLat1 = bbox1[1][0] - bbox1[0][0]
>>              > 0.11103100000000055
>>             iD.geoLatToMeters(dLat1)
>>              > 12359.91438226802
>>             dLon1 = bbox1[1][1] - bbox1[0][1]
>>              > 0.11741700000000321
>>             iD.geoLonToMeters(dLon1, (bbox1[1][0] + bbox1[0][0])/2)
>>              > 11884.145336433623
>>
>>             (image1 is 11.884 km x 12.359 km)
>>
>>
>>             bbox2 = [[48.632228,-101.369133], [48.691074,-101.251717]]
>>
>>             dLat2 = bbox2[1][0] - bbox2[0][0]
>>              > 0.05884600000000262
>>             iD.geoLatToMeters(dLat2)
>>              > 6550.706755221268
>>             dLon2 = bbox2[1][1] - bbox2[0][1]
>>              > 0.11741600000000574
>>             iD.geoLonToMeters(dLon2, (bbox2[1][0] + bbox2[0][0])/2)
>>              > 8604.30156213755
>>
>>             (image2 is 8.604 km x 6.550 km)
>>
>>
>>             Bryan
>>
>>
>>
>>>             On Jan 1, 2018, at 6:56 AM, Bjoern Hassler
>>>             <bjohas+mw at gmail.com <mailto:bjohas+mw at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             Hi Darafei, dear all,
>>>
>>>             Thanks, but I still cannot get this to work.
>>>
>>>             I've now calculated real_scale = mapnik_scale / cos(lat),
>>>             and used the real_scale, to calculate:
>>>
>>>             pixels * (72/2.54 pixels/cm) * real_scale = real_world_dim
>>>
>>>             However, there's still a latitude-dependent discrepancy
>>>             (see below). I could try to fit that to latitude, to see
>>>             what the formula is, but I'm hoping somebody has the
>>>             answer (or can let me know what I got wrong!)
>>>
>>>             Happy new year!
>>>             Bjoern
>>>
>>>             *Example 1:*
>>>             http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/24.1788/49.3092
>>>             bbox = [24.123255,49.250507; 24.234286,49.367924]
>>>             bbox size in degrees (lon, lat) = 0.117416, 0.111031
>>>             *Pixels ('Image ... at'):* 1945 x 2016;
>>>             *mapnik_scale* 1 : 24000; *real scale *1 : 26308
>>>             Image dim (1 : 26308, 72dpi): 686 mm x 711 mm
>>>             Real world dim (1:1, from pixels): *18.051 km x 18.71 km*
>>>             Real world dim (1:1, latlon): *11.911 km x 12.346 km*
>>>             Ratio (dim pixels/ dim latlon): 1.516 ; 1.515
>>>
>>>             *Example 2:*
>>>             http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/48.6617/-101.3104
>>>             bbox = [48.632228,-101.369133; 48.691074,-101.251717]
>>>             bbox size in degrees (lon, lat) = 0.117416, 0.058846
>>>             *Pixels ('Image ... at'):* 1945 x 1476;
>>>             *mapnik_scale* 1 : 24000; *real scale *1 : 36336
>>>             Image dim (1 : 36336, 72dpi): 686 mm x 521 mm
>>>             Real world dim (1:1, from pixels): *24.932 km x 18.92 km*
>>>             Real world dim (1:1, latlon):*8.624 km x 6.543 km*
>>>             Ratio (dim pixels/ dim latlon): 2.891 ; 2.891
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>             On 31 December 2017 at 18:59, Darafei "Komяpa"
>>>             Praliaskouski <me at komzpa.net <mailto:me at komzpa.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>                 Images are in Spherical Mercator EPSG:3857 projection,
>>>                 so linear scale is off by cos(lat).
>>>
>>>
>>>                 On Sun, Dec 31, 2017, 20:07 Bjoern Hassler
>>>                 <bjohas+mw at gmail.com <mailto:bjohas%2Bmw at gmail.com>>
>>>                 wrote:
>>>
>>>                     Dear friends,
>>>
>>>                     I'm trying to make sense of the scales for map
>>>                     images downloaded from OSM. For the download, you
>>>                     can choose the scale, and I had assumed that I
>>>                     could use this to convert to an actual map scale.
>>>
>>>                     The downloaded png/jpg etc seem to be at 72dpi. I
>>>                     had assumed I could just convert pixels at 72dpi
>>>                     to actual dimensions (using the scale).
>>>
>>>                     However - as far as I can tell - this doesn't
>>>                     work. Maybe I've made a mistake somewhere, but the
>>>                     dimensions calculated from
>>>
>>>                       * "feature in pixels" / (72/2.54 pixels/cm) *
>>>                         scale = "feature size" in cm
>>>                       * lat-lon (e.g. bounding box provided)
>>>
>>>                     Doesn't match. Moreover, the difference doesn't
>>>                     seem to be a constant offset or ratio, but
>>>                     possibly latitude dependent.
>>>
>>>                     Maybe the scale offered during download is not
>>>                     meant to be a geographic scale? Maybe I've
>>>                     misunderstood something?
>>>                     There are two worked examples below, that show the
>>>                     issue.
>>>
>>>                     Any thoughts?
>>>                     Bjoern
>>>
>>>                     (and a Happy New Year!!)
>>>
>>>
>>>                     *Example 1:*
>>>
>>>                     I had a look for long straight roads ... (Trivia:
>>>                     
>>> http://www.dangerousroads.org/rankings23/3759-the-10-longest-straight-roads-in-the-world.html 
>>>
>>>                     - "Located in the heart of Saudi Arabia, the
>>>                     Highway 10  is 120 miles (193km) stretch of
>>>                     straightness. This asphalted road links Haradh and
>>>                     Al Batha. It’s a straight road running right
>>>                     through the desert for 2 h 1 min.")
>>>
>>>                     - Open 'share',
>>>                     - set scale to 1:50000,
>>>                     - adjust view port so that "Image will show
>>>                     standard layer at 932x..."
>>>                     - Go here:
>>>                     http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/24.1349/49.3083
>>>
>>>                     On the map, there's a road (East/West), with two
>>>                     turn-off: First, a power line at the Eastern edge
>>>                     (running North/South). In the west, there are two
>>>                     turn-off, the second (straight one) being 11.9 km
>>>                     from the power line (according to JOSM). In the
>>>                     image, you've got those right at the edges. From
>>>                     the bounding box (hidden fields), I calculate
>>>                     11.62km. Given that the roads are just showing
>>>                     either side of the image, that's bang on.
>>>
>>>                     Now download PNG, which will have with 932. I am
>>>                     assuming I have a PNG (72dpi = 28.35 dots per cm),
>>>                     at scale 1:50,000. I calculate:
>>>
>>>                     932 pixels / (72/2.54 pixels/cm) * 50000 = 16.4 km.
>>>
>>>                     So there's a difference between the dimensions
>>>                     calculated from the pixels and the distance
>>>                     calculated from lat/lon.
>>>
>>>                     *Full details for Example 1:*
>>>
>>>                     Z/L/L #13/24.1727/49.3090
>>>                     bbox = [24.119651808471247,49.249992370605476 ->
>>>                     24.22567631717543,49.368095397949226]
>>>                     Pixel dim: 939 x 924;
>>>                     Natural image dim (72dpi): 331 mm x 326 mm, 1 : 
>>> 50000
>>>                     Real world dim (from pixels): 16.563 km x 16.298
>>>                     km, 1 : 1
>>>                     Real world dim (latlon): 11.981 km x 11.789 km, 1 
>>> : 1
>>>                     Ratio: 1.382438861530757 ; 1.3824751887352615
>>>
>>>                     *Example 2:*
>>>
>>>                     Another example from the above list:
>>>
>>>                     Z/L/L #13/48.6536/-101.3485
>>>                     bbox = [48.615207636211146,-101.44741058349611 ->
>>>                     48.69198023486001,-101.24965667724611]
>>>                     Pixel dim: 1572 x 924;
>>>                     Natural image dim (72dpi): 555 mm x 326 mm, 1 : 
>>> 50000
>>>                     Real world dim (from pixels): 27.728 km x 16.298
>>>                     km, 1 : 1
>>>                     Real world dim (latlon): 14.526 km x 8.537 km, 1 : 1
>>>                     Ratio: 1.908853091009225 ; 1.909101557924329
>>>
>>>                     The distance (along the highway) from the turnoffs
>>>                     to Undip / Lansford airstrips is 8.1km in JOSM. So
>>>                     the latlon calculation is correct. However, the
>>>                     dimension calculated from the pixels isn't.
>>>                     _______________________________________________
>>>                     dev mailing list
>>>                     dev at openstreetmap.org <mailto:dev at openstreetmap.org>
>>>                     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
>>>
>>>
>>>             _______________________________________________
>>>             dev mailing list
>>>             dev at openstreetmap.org <mailto:dev at openstreetmap.org>
>>>             https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/



More information about the dev mailing list