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 [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
