[Talk-us] Recent Aerial Photo Imagery Changes

[Rihards]

On 2017.09.26. 03:09, David Wisbey wrote:
> Fellow mappers,
> 
> So what's up with the recent changes in our aerial photo imagery?
> 
> It used to be so simple and I followed the rule(?) of making sure features
> line up with Bing imagery.  I'm wondering about that now - big time.
> I have been mapping in a variety of locations lately and the situation is
> different in each location.  In Minnesota, for instance, I really don't want
> to use Bing imagery unless at some zoom level it shows me the most
> current images (especially in high growth areas like northwest Rochester).
> And when recently updating an intersection in southwest Minnesota to a
> new roundabout, I was aghast at what Bing was giving me and so only used
> it where the quality/resolution "wasn't TOO bad". Sad. Mapbox, ESRI and
> other imagery were all much better choices, especially between Blomkest
> and Hutchinson, MN.
> 
> So the main question now is: Does the "line up with Bing" rule still stand?
> In recent work around the city of Virginia, Minnesota (re-routing of US 53)
> I felt I had to use Mapbox imagery and so lined up what I could with it
> rather
> than Bing. In most cases, they matched or were off by only 2 meters or so.

there has never been a rule to "line up with Bing", quite the opposite -
you should not unconditionally line up with any imagery layer, unless
you know for sure it's extremely precise.
regarding imagery layers like sat/ortophoto, it has always been
suggested to check and align them to gps traces from the area (while
keeping in mind that one or few traces might be all wrong, the centre
line of many traces being the best).

> I would provide a link to show you the worst area I found (along MN 7
> several
> miles east of Blomkest) but Openstreetmap.org seems to be down right now.
> 
> David
> Your Village Maps
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 


-- 
 Rihards