Ian Dees wrote: >Sent: 24 September 2009 9:35 PM >To: Laurence Penney >Cc: Talk OSM >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Distance to opacity (OT) > > > >On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Laurence Penney <l...@lorp.org> wrote: > > > Was "Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?" > >> Well, let's take this intersection: > >> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=- >26.124795,152.574151&panoid=H08s6qv1gLXcd8hGtNhvwg&cbp=12,333.55,,0,2.6&ll= >-26.124704,152.574123&spn=0,359.996175&z=18 > > OT... > > ... but I couldn't help admiring the beauty of how the cursor changes > from horizontal to vertical in this image. I'd seen it before, and > assumed it was based on where the horizon was - neat but not that > tricky. But no, this location, with a rocky wall close on one side >and > open space on the other, demonstrates that the cursor knows about > distance to opacity! I can only assume Google grabs some info from >the > stitching process, building 3D info to feed into the Street View UI. > > >Their streetview cars also use LIDAR to get a depthmap as they drive.
And all way more interesting than the original thread ;-) Cheers Andy _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
