[HOT] imagery date

Bjoern Hassler bjohas+mw at gmail.com
Fri Jun 16 17:29:39 UTC 2017


Dear Ralph, Michael, Andrew, dear friends,

The available imagery and associated quality is a little confusing, but it
seems that it's basically a trial an error process?

For example, I was comparing imagery for
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/3177. The DG Standard is clearly best,
better than Bing. However, DG Premium seems to derive from Bing - it's
close to Bing, and much worse than DG Standard. Why is it that DG Premium
is worse than DG Standard? I've also noticed that in European areas, Bing
can be better than DG. That might be because Bing is enhanced by
plane-based imagery in cities?

Two questions:

1. Does anybody know of cases in HOT areas where Bing is better than DG?

2. @Andrew: When you say you can provide DG via NextView - is that DG
imagery different (better?) from the DG Standard/Premium (now) available
via OSM by default?

Bjoern

On 15 June 2017 at 19:48, Andrew McKenna <amckenna01 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all--
>
> Depending on the nature of the task and mapping project, we may be able to
> provide DigitalGlobe imagery for the OSM community through the US
> Department of State's MapGive initiative, which provides DG imagery to OSM
> projects through the NextView license. This is especially true if the
> project has a humanitarian component in NE Nigeria.
>
> Who setup these tasks?
>
> Cheers,
> Andrew
>
> ---------------------------
> *Andrew G. McKenna*
> +1 828.273.8225 <+1%20828-273-8225> (mobile)
> amckenna12 (skype)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Michael Heißmeier <
> michael63 at digital-filestore.de> wrote:
>
>> Ralf Stephan, 2017-06-14 16:18:
>>
>> Hello,
>> in working on the project 2768 (Northern Borno) I encountered tasks where
>> our imagery (Bing, DG, Mapbox) is so out of date that work is difficult
>> because somehow other mappers (from Missing Maps?) have added lots of new
>> buildings/roads that don't show in the above imagery. But the buildings are
>> even visible in Google Maps:
>> https://www.google.de/maps/@11.882244,13.2607636,452m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en
>>
>> The Premium DigitalGlobe imagery has the (tile info) date of this week
>> but doesn't show these buildings. Neither does older Bing imagery of the
>> area.
>>
>>
>> Bing imagery in this area has a capture date from February 2014, the
>> DigitalGlobe layers do not reveal their capture dates. The "last
>> modification" date on the tile info window is always a current date and
>> does not indicate when these images were taken. DigitalGlobe has a "vintage
>> map" for the standard layer which for this area indicates capture dates
>> from 2015. The Premium layer mostly fills gaps with higher resolution or
>> lower cloud cover but may provide older imagery (
>> https://mapsapidocs.digitalglobe.com/docs/imagery-and-basemaps)
>>
>> What's wrong with the imagery we use? Is it really this fresh? What
>> imagery is really the newest and how to access it?
>>
>>
>> The buildings mapped in OSM in this area are mostly from HOT TM project
>> 2635 which used recent imagery kindly provided by Airbus specifically for
>> this mapping project. Such images have to be negotiated on a case-by-case
>> basis if available "standard" imagery proves to be too old or of
>> insufficient resolution. Unfortunately there is no way how to tell which of
>> the available imagery layers provides the newest imagery.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing listHOT at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> *Michael (osm:michael63) *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20170616/a96f043b/attachment.html>


More information about the HOT mailing list