Why have two different versions of the same map produced by different printers?
The individual was on decent paper (100gsm or more) with colours that were right. The relay map was on thin paper with very lemon yellows, making the marram grass, rough open, less easy to distinguish from the short grass.
Laser printed maps can be almost as good as offset but they need to be set up right and it doesn't look like the enough care was taken over the relay map
BOC Maps
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
I noticed this aswell. The individual map was far better than the relay and as you say the vegetation was easier to distinguish, the relay map was too shiny. Maybe they had too different planners who sent the courses to different printers.
- RWK
- orange
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:08 pm
- Location: Leeds
I agree with Mharky, thought the 1:15 was good, a lot better than I expected.
Looking at the relay map again now, the contour lines don't stand out as well as they did on the individual map.
Looking at the relay map again now, the contour lines don't stand out as well as they did on the individual map.
'They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist.....' Last words of General John Sedgewick, 1864.
-
Mike - orange
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:39 pm
- Location: Sheffield la la la
I thought the relay map was a god send after the 1:15,000 on the individual. I couldn't read the contours in the open areas imparticular and had to keep stopping to check the map, I had no such problems with the 1:10,000 used for the relay.
Fish are friends not food!
-
Rich - orange
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 1:50 pm
- Location: At work in Edwinstowe - Home of Robin Hood
I had trouble with both. The 1:15 wasn't as bad as I thought, and made the longer legs easier to read. I couldn't do any fine navigation with it though, just ran to the middle of the circle and hunted.
Then again, as some features moved tens of metres between the two maps, that might not have been a bad strategy.
Perhaps it would have been clearer if mapped at 1:15000, omitting some of the smaller pits, depressions and paths and adding a few tags on the contours. Penhale is not so detailed as to be unmappable at 1:15, but its difficult to do when starting with a 1:10 map as you need to judge what to take off.
1:10 might have been better, but magnifying glasses just dont work in the rain!
I thought the course planning was very good, getting a lot of variety out of the area.
Graeme
Then again, as some features moved tens of metres between the two maps, that might not have been a bad strategy.
Perhaps it would have been clearer if mapped at 1:15000, omitting some of the smaller pits, depressions and paths and adding a few tags on the contours. Penhale is not so detailed as to be unmappable at 1:15, but its difficult to do when starting with a 1:10 map as you need to judge what to take off.
1:10 might have been better, but magnifying glasses just dont work in the rain!
I thought the course planning was very good, getting a lot of variety out of the area.
Graeme
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4726
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Mike wrote:I agree with Mharky, thought the 1:15 was good, a lot better than I expected.
Looking at the relay map again now, the contour lines don't stand out as well as they did on the individual map.
Don't forget, they printed the Elite 1:15 maps the old way (colour separated), whereas for the 1:10 maps (individual non-elite and relays) they used laser printing, which doesn't give you quite the same clarity or colour accuracy.
If the same printing method had been used for both, I'd expect the 1:10 to be easier to read.
-
Spookster - god
- Posts: 2267
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:49 pm
- Location: Sheffield
I disagree if they had been printed the same it would've been easier on the 1:10 - don't forget all the symbols are bigger so they take up roughly as much relative space (did that make sense?). Comparing my 1:10 with my Brother's 1:15 I found not much difference in readability or with printing coming off (small amounts on both).
The big difference is with 1:15 you didn't have to run around with a tablecloth in your hand sticking out about a foot on the long legs!
We've been at this discussion last week but if it's too complex to map at 1:15 then why not use 1:15 symbols on the 1:10? If you can use 1:10 symbols then it works at 1:15 so should be. Also isn't it usual to have 1:7500 for short sighted classes (sorry) if 21's are on 1:10?
The big difference is with 1:15 you didn't have to run around with a tablecloth in your hand sticking out about a foot on the long legs!
We've been at this discussion last week but if it's too complex to map at 1:15 then why not use 1:15 symbols on the 1:10? If you can use 1:10 symbols then it works at 1:15 so should be. Also isn't it usual to have 1:7500 for short sighted classes (sorry) if 21's are on 1:10?
-
FatBoy - addict
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:46 pm
FatBoy wrote: don't forget all the symbols are bigger so they take up roughly as much relative space (did that make sense?).
It makes sense but its wrong. On Penhale e.g. the U depression symbols are the same size on the 1:10 and 1:15 - i.e. the 1:15 map isn't simply an shrinking of the 1:10.
The point is that the original map is 1:10 - and very accurate one too. If the mapper set out to make a 1:15 map, then he would have made a different judgement of what level of detail to include.
Graeme
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4726
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Graeme wrote:It makes sense but its wrong. On Penhale e.g. the U depression symbols are the same size on the 1:10 and 1:15 - i.e. the 1:15 map isn't simply an shrinking of the 1:10.
I haven't studied the difference in that much detail. Is the 1:10 now all 1:10 symbols are some (e.g. u depression) still 1:15? Certainly the contours and the sandy screen are 1:10 symbols.
Graeme wrote:The point is that the original map is 1:10 - and very accurate one too. If the mapper set out to make a 1:15 map, then he would have made a different judgement of what level of detail to include.
Agreed 100%. I think what I'm trying to say is that it should've been mapped at 1:15 in the first place. I've never seen anywhere else in the world other than the UK that thinks an area is too complex to map at 1:15. I'm happy to be contradicted on this!
-
FatBoy - addict
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:46 pm
FatBoy wrote:I've never seen anywhere else in the world other than the UK that thinks an area is too complex to map at 1:15. I'm happy to be contradicted on this!
Most races I've done in Finland have been 1:10, including a number of Jukolas and Fin 5. Some of these areas weren't even overly complex, but Finnish maps show a lot of detail so 1:10 seems to be the default in most cases. At Fin 5 in 2000, all normal classes including the elite used 1:10 while the World Cup runners had to use 1:15. There was a thunderstorm on one of the days and a number of the World Cup folk had a lot of problems reading the 1:15 map in the green bits.
I haven't seen the maps from this weekend so I can't comment on their legibility. However, it does seem odd that the British Elite Champs in 2005 is required to use 1:15 when the Elite Champs in 2004, also held on sand dunes, was on a 1:10 map. Or did someone realise that a 1:15 version of Lossie really would be unusable.
Patrick
- Patrick
- light green
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:01 pm
- Location: Glesca toon
Whilst recognising that Elites need to comply with IOF standards etc it is also necessary to consider your average orienteering punter.
I, for one, found it very difficult on sunday to read a 1:10,000 map in the wind and rain when my glasses were no use due to the condiitions.
It was simply a matter of aiming for the circle and searching, It was necessary to match what you saw to the map, particularly contours which could have been hills or depressions.
I, for one, found it very difficult on sunday to read a 1:10,000 map in the wind and rain when my glasses were no use due to the condiitions.
It was simply a matter of aiming for the circle and searching, It was necessary to match what you saw to the map, particularly contours which could have been hills or depressions.
- redkite
- green
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 5:40 pm
- Location: Wales
I hope you don't mind me asking Redkite, but how old are you? I accept that older people and younger ones need larger scale maps for different reasons. So does the rules:
So what we see is this rule being broken continually, including by the Finns in IOF's back yard?
Also of note is the last paragraph - the sandy dot screen at 1:10 I find obliterates everything underneath it. Seems IOF agree with me!
IOF Map Rules wrote:3.1 Scale
The scale for an orienteering map is 1:15 000. Terrain that cannot be fieldworked at a scale of 1:7500 and legibly presented at a scale of 1:15 000, is not suitable for international foot-orienteering.
Maps at 1:10 000 may be produced for relay and short distance competitions. The scale 1:10 000 is recommended for older age groups (45 and above) where reading fine lines and small symbols may cause problems or for younger age groups (age classes 16 and below) where the capacity of reading complex maps is not fully developed.
Maps at 1:10 000 must be drawn with lines, line screens and symbol dimensions 50% greater than those used for 1:15 000 maps.
Where practical the same dot screens as used at 1:15 000 will give the most legible map and are therefore to be preferred.
So what we see is this rule being broken continually, including by the Finns in IOF's back yard?
Also of note is the last paragraph - the sandy dot screen at 1:10 I find obliterates everything underneath it. Seems IOF agree with me!
-
FatBoy - addict
- Posts: 1042
- Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:46 pm
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 196 guests