Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Antelope Island State Park Map.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Image:Antelope Island State Park Map.jpg[edit]

Antelope Island State Park

  •  Comment Using ArcGIS to make a professional looking map is almost a joke. I've just learned lots of little tricks and to hit the save button every change I make (lol?) Justinmorris 04:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Adam Cuerden 00:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral for now --Very clear and clean professional type map but I've got some remarks : the shape of the bathymetry looks sometimes strange, like the first level in the Bridger Bay. Can the author confirm this ? The bathymetric scale is missing. Also, the choice of the grey / white colours is imo surprising : I know it highlights the representation of the relief but at first sight these heights seem to be tremendously high (like covered by eternal snow), which is not the case. But the most important is that I would like a SVG version (for the labels) being available : the purpose of a map is also to be easily translated and used through the whole project. A JPG version alone makes this task very difficult. Sting 02:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment No bathymetric data for the Great Salt Lake exists. It's buffered for cartographic purposes, although the representation is not far from reality. The map looks extremely plain with a solid color. I would not have added it if I felt it was being misleading/inacurate. Perhaps a note on the map explaining this would be appropriate. SVG is pointless when there is raster data, I can provide a blank JPG for labeling in other languages. Justinmorris 04:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there's no data available for the bathymetry I don't see the point to simulate it because it gives the wrong impression that the whole map is drawn with a 1;30,000 scale. With Inkscape you can embed a raster image (your background map) in a SVG format file in which the labels are in this last format, allowing an easy modification of the text without having to modify the raster image and loosing information. Sting 12:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's quiet simple : open your raster background map in Inkscape then add a layer in which you write your text (best with Times New Roman or Arial fonts). To embed the image, go to Effects -> Images -> Embed all images (or something like that : I have it in French) and then save the whole in SVG format. Sting 14:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Bathymetry fancied ! If there are no data do not show any representation. Just from a google Earth view one can see bathymetry is not so regular.--B.navez 09:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't vote "oppose" anymore but I'm not yet convinced. What is a map for? To make Earth surface understandable by simplifying. So I find microrelief too sharp (sharper than real becaused merging vegetation and stones), choice of standard colors make this island in the Great Salt Lake look like an island north of Siberia, file size is useless too great (picture not easy to upload) and text is too small for web uses.--B.navez 18:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Because it is impossible to translate to other language and colors are quite flat. --QWerk 16:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - ArcGis is a powerfull tool and the result of your work is nice to see. I won't vote because I have no effective way of assessing the accuracy of the map. But there is one aspect that I think could be improved, which is the representation of the relief. There is a quite steep slope in the east-west direction (an average value of about 30º 12º ) which is not well illustrated. In the map, it seems that the terrain is quite flat from the coast up to very close to the mountain's top, which is not the case (see the aerial photo in Google) Alvesgaspar 20:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uhh, I didn't make the data, and it's not inaccurate. Know what though? Nothing seems good enough for some people, so fuck this site. I withdraw this nomination. And yes you do have the ability to check it. Go here and to download the DEMs/NEDs. Looking at an aerial from, of all places Google Earth, one cannot determine the accuracy of slopes. Justinmorris 03:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's a bit unfair ! Critics help to improve and those above are not inappropriate. Modern maps have isolines, otherwise from just colours and shades everyone makes his own interpretation. And raw data though genuine include artefacts which are not really relief, so it is necessary to make some smoothing. --B.navez 09:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • In this case a fancy elevation scale, taken from the ArcGis default options, was used. That was a quite poor solution, as no quantitative information can be taken from that scale. It would have been better to use a monochromatic sequence complemented with elevation contours (and shadows). As for the slope, it can be calculated from the map itself, by dividing the height above the water (at the peak) by the distance to the lake. Anyway, the author has withdrawn the nomination and doesn't look very interested in constructive technical advice. -- Alvesgaspar 10:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... which is a shame as some users here, Alvesgaspar among them, are extremely knowledgeable about cartography and can help by providing professional feedback. Alvesgaspar teaches cartographic sciences at university level Commons:Meet our photographers#Joaquim Alves Gaspar; why not welcome his expertise rather than swearing at him? --MichaelMaggs 13:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 23:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Antelope_Island_State_Park_Map.jpg&oldid=164710097"