Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Albert Pundt]

I concur, thanks for sharing that, Richard! Also reminded me I need to
update my imagery source list in JOSM...

As for me saying my original post was dumb, I didn't mean the very idea of
pointing out the inferior elements of the various imagery sources, I meant
more it appearing to come off as forgetting that, like Ian said, access to
these sources is a privilege and not a right, and I thought it was sounding
like the kind of attitude of entitlement that I'd make fun of in other
contexts...

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:24 PM, EthnicFood IsGreat <
ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 03:30:14 -0600 (CST)
>> From: Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>
>> To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?
>>
>>
>> The previous ESRI imagery has just been restored to the imagery list (by
>> ESRI, so 100% legit) under the name “Clarity”.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
> Great!  I'm glad to hear that.  I use that imagery more than any other.
> Thanks for sharing that news.
>
> Mark
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
—Albert
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[EthnicFood IsGreat]

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 03:30:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?


The previous ESRI imagery has just been restored to the imagery list (by
ESRI, so 100% legit) under the name “Clarity”.

Richard




Great!  I'm glad to hear that.  I use that imagery more than any other.  
Thanks for sharing that news.


Mark

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Richard Fairhurst]

The previous ESRI imagery has just been restored to the imagery list (by
ESRI, so 100% legit) under the name “Clarity”. 

Richard 



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/USA-f5284732.html

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Marc Gemis]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:49 AM, Rihards  wrote:
> On 2018.01.31. 03:16, Albert Pundt wrote:
>> Yeah, that wasn't right of me... I've been using the other sources for a
>> bit now and it's really not as bad as I thought it was, plus there's
>> more of the old imagery still available than I thought through
>> Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard all over Pennsylvania, just not where I'm
>> currently working on. I guess the relatively high quality (albeit very
>> outdated by the time it was updated) imagery for the whole country
>> spoiled me a little too much. :P
>>
>> Ignore my previous post, it was dumb.
>
> your original post did not seem dumb or impolite to me, but that must be
> the cultural differences all over again :)
>

I was about to write the same. I think you only mentioned some
problems with the current imagery, which are observable facts.

regards

m.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Rihards]

On 2018.01.31. 03:16, Albert Pundt wrote:
> Yeah, that wasn't right of me... I've been using the other sources for a
> bit now and it's really not as bad as I thought it was, plus there's
> more of the old imagery still available than I thought through
> Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard all over Pennsylvania, just not where I'm
> currently working on. I guess the relatively high quality (albeit very
> outdated by the time it was updated) imagery for the whole country
> spoiled me a little too much. :P
> 
> Ignore my previous post, it was dumb.

your original post did not seem dumb or impolite to me, but that must be
the cultural differences all over again :)

the suggestion about more local imagery is good, albeit requires more
manual work to find and use those. texas has published very good
ortophoto data, not sure whether this will be picked up by any of the
providers we have available now.

https://josm.openstreetmap.de/mapsview?entry=Texas%20Orthophoto

i recall it being mentioned that this imagery is published under an
osm-good licence, but cannot find any sources right now.

> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Ian Dees  > wrote:
> 
> Hi Albert,
> 
> Please keep in mind that all of this data you're complaining about
> is donated to the OSM community and it's a privilege to have access
> to it. Please don't take your frustrations out on the providers that
> are letting us use their service for free.
> 
> All of the providers that donate their imagery are constantly adding
> or improving imagery. Since it takes a lot of work to make these
> imagery layers, the "previous iteration" is probably not out there
> in any way. The best you can do is go to the provider and ask them
> to improve the imagery so that the next imagery update can have
> better imagery.
> 
> Also, keep an eye out for local imagery from the state (through
> NAIP, for example), your county, or city. Governments in the US
> frequently post their imagery online for you to use.
> 
> -Ian
> 
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Albert Pundt  > wrote:
> 
> With the exception of the higher-resolution imagery in cities,
> the current Bing/ESRI World Imagery is worse than the previous
> iteration in every way except for being newer. It's blurry,
> often distorted, and frequently has clouds covering it. The
> previous imagery was crisper and rarely if ever had clouds, and
> what little distortion there was was obvious and avoidable.
> 
> Is there any way to still access this imagery, or at least a
> better alternative to the current Bing/ESRI imagery? If the
> former, then the outdatedness of it could be easily worked
> around by comparing to the other imagery available. It must
> exist "out there" in some capacity, since the
> Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard imagery still uses it in western
> Pennsylvania, and even in some low zoom levels on Bing.
> 
> I would use some of the other nationwide imagery options
> available in JOSM, but most of them are   either low-resolution
> or with color so bright and washed out it's often difficult to
> map with.
> 
> —Albert
> -- 
> —Albert-- 
 Rihards

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Albert Pundt]

Yeah, that wasn't right of me... I've been using the other sources for a
bit now and it's really not as bad as I thought it was, plus there's more
of the old imagery still available than I thought through
Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard all over Pennsylvania, just not where I'm
currently working on. I guess the relatively high quality (albeit very
outdated by the time it was updated) imagery for the whole country spoiled
me a little too much. :P

Ignore my previous post, it was dumb.

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:

> Hi Albert,
>
> Please keep in mind that all of this data you're complaining about is
> donated to the OSM community and it's a privilege to have access to it.
> Please don't take your frustrations out on the providers that are letting
> us use their service for free.
>
> All of the providers that donate their imagery are constantly adding or
> improving imagery. Since it takes a lot of work to make these imagery
> layers, the "previous iteration" is probably not out there in any way. The
> best you can do is go to the provider and ask them to improve the imagery
> so that the next imagery update can have better imagery.
>
> Also, keep an eye out for local imagery from the state (through NAIP, for
> example), your county, or city. Governments in the US frequently post their
> imagery online for you to use.
>
> -Ian
>
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Albert Pundt 
> wrote:
>
>> With the exception of the higher-resolution imagery in cities, the
>> current Bing/ESRI World Imagery is worse than the previous iteration in
>> every way except for being newer. It's blurry, often distorted, and
>> frequently has clouds covering it. The previous imagery was crisper and
>> rarely if ever had clouds, and what little distortion there was was obvious
>> and avoidable.
>>
>> Is there any way to still access this imagery, or at least a better
>> alternative to the current Bing/ESRI imagery? If the former, then the
>> outdatedness of it could be easily worked around by comparing to the other
>> imagery available. It must exist "out there" in some capacity, since the
>> Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard imagery still uses it in western Pennsylvania,
>> and even in some low zoom levels on Bing.
>>
>> I would use some of the other nationwide imagery options available in
>> JOSM, but most of them are   either low-resolution or with color so bright
>> and washed out it's often difficult to map with.
>>
>> —Albert
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
>


-- 
—Albert
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Ian Dees]

Hi Albert,

Please keep in mind that all of this data you're complaining about is
donated to the OSM community and it's a privilege to have access to it.
Please don't take your frustrations out on the providers that are letting
us use their service for free.

All of the providers that donate their imagery are constantly adding or
improving imagery. Since it takes a lot of work to make these imagery
layers, the "previous iteration" is probably not out there in any way. The
best you can do is go to the provider and ask them to improve the imagery
so that the next imagery update can have better imagery.

Also, keep an eye out for local imagery from the state (through NAIP, for
example), your county, or city. Governments in the US frequently post their
imagery online for you to use.

-Ian

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Albert Pundt  wrote:

> With the exception of the higher-resolution imagery in cities, the current
> Bing/ESRI World Imagery is worse than the previous iteration in every way
> except for being newer. It's blurry, often distorted, and frequently has
> clouds covering it. The previous imagery was crisper and rarely if ever had
> clouds, and what little distortion there was was obvious and avoidable.
>
> Is there any way to still access this imagery, or at least a better
> alternative to the current Bing/ESRI imagery? If the former, then the
> outdatedness of it could be easily worked around by comparing to the other
> imagery available. It must exist "out there" in some capacity, since the
> Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard imagery still uses it in western Pennsylvania,
> and even in some low zoom levels on Bing.
>
> I would use some of the other nationwide imagery options available in
> JOSM, but most of them are   either low-resolution or with color so bright
> and washed out it's often difficult to map with.
>
> —Albert
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Old Bing/ESRI satellite imagery?

[Albert Pundt]

With the exception of the higher-resolution imagery in cities, the current
Bing/ESRI World Imagery is worse than the previous iteration in every way
except for being newer. It's blurry, often distorted, and frequently has
clouds covering it. The previous imagery was crisper and rarely if ever had
clouds, and what little distortion there was was obvious and avoidable.

Is there any way to still access this imagery, or at least a better
alternative to the current Bing/ESRI imagery? If the former, then the
outdatedness of it could be easily worked around by comparing to the other
imagery available. It must exist "out there" in some capacity, since the
Mapbox/Digitalglobe Standard imagery still uses it in western Pennsylvania,
and even in some low zoom levels on Bing.

I would use some of the other nationwide imagery options available in JOSM,
but most of them are   either low-resolution or with color so bright and
washed out it's often difficult to map with.

—Albert
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us