|
|
Post by Bumstead on Oct 9, 2019 14:24:00 GMT -5
Greywalls is a hard course with a lot of collection areas for balls not right on target. The greens can be very undulating many will be hard to 2 putt.
Greywalls V1 Lidar
|
|
|
|
Post by mngolfdesigns on Oct 13, 2019 8:02:20 GMT -5
how did your sand traps and greens line up with the LiDAR?
I see you used the bing imagery on OSM and I have never been able to use bing and have the features line up with LiDAR.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bumstead on Nov 9, 2019 13:33:56 GMT -5
That's the only seem that works for me. If I try another method they are off quite a bit. Some of the other ones make it easier to outline but when I run it everything is out of position. Bing doesn't always come in perfect or that could be due to bad outlining.
|
|
|
|
Post by mngolfdesigns on Nov 10, 2019 14:32:33 GMT -5
That's the only seem that works for me. If I try another method they are off quite a bit. Some of the other ones make it easier to outline but when I run it everything is out of position. Bing doesn't always come in perfect or that could be due to bad outlining. Bing works about 10% of the courses I've made (over 50). I think it's a problem with the imagery and less with the outlining, as it's easy to see errors/lack of detail in the outlines. Mapbox satellite and esri clarity beta seem to be the most reliable across the country. Bing imagery seems rather out of date on a few of the more recent courses I've made. |
|
|
|
Post by Bumstead on Nov 12, 2019 12:00:01 GMT -5
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind and I'll take another look a Greywalls with Mapbox. I noticed the contrast difference with bing and the other methods.
Dorba
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 13:02:49 GMT -5
You guys know there's a 'terrain shift' feature built into TGCTools? Assuming you're talking about alignment issues that are constant across an entire plot, rather than inconsistencies within the data itself. If it is the latter you can still fix it, just more time consuming to do so (I think the best method for addressing alignment inconsistencies within a plot is to have your course file open in TGC and OSM pulled up, analyze the alignment error for a specific shape [after dealing with macro-alignment first], and move the shape/s on OSM a bit to counter the inconsistencies where necessary...and then re-import to check for improvements). Other people hay have a better method that I'm not aware of, but between moving a ton of splines in TGC and doing it in a few clicks on OSM, it's pretty clear which is easier and more time efficient.
This is relatively rare but it's not uncommon to find a couple shapes that need to be re-positioned, even more so if the OSM image you used was taken either before or after some course changes were made [compared to when the LiDAR data is from]. If you suspect course renovations of any type it's a good idea to start by opening up Google Earth, use the image timeline (clock with a green arrow pointing 'back in time') and check to see how much things have (or have not changed) relative to when the LiDAR data was collected. In cases where a course underwent any significant reworking, this can prevent headaches later on.
|
|
|
|
Post by paddyjk19 on Nov 13, 2019 15:25:20 GMT -5
Best method is to use bunkers as reference points;
Use the compass to see which direction the terrain needs to be shifted and measure how far out they are and then shift by meters (2.4 = 2.4 meters).
Is this particular course published? Looks like it needs work, I can see the mapped wood outline still there (mulch)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 17:16:05 GMT -5
Best method is to use bunkers as reference points; Use the compass to see which direction the terrain needs to be shifted and measure how far out they are and then shift by meters (2.4 = 2.4 meters). Is this particular course published? Looks like it needs work, I can see the mapped wood outline still there (mulch) That's exactly how you use the terrain shift function. Only thing is the in-game compass doesn't always line up with the actual one. I'm not sure if you always want to use the 'actual' direction but I think that worked for my courses? not positive.
I'd actually counter-argue that it's not always best to look at bunkers. If they have any alignment inconsistency issues it's better to look at the greens and try to nail those down first. But if the alignment is consistent with itself, using bunkers instead of greens makes things a lot easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by paddyjk19 on Nov 14, 2019 3:03:44 GMT -5
Bunkers work great if you pick small perfect circles I.e pot like bunkers, it’s easier to see then exactly how far and in which direction shifting is required, on the 3 RCRs I’ve done so far I’ve only had to shift 2/3 meters in one direction only so it’s not been too hard.
That said, I traced a whole course on OSM and found out that half the course was using different Ariel images so it was 9 meters out in parts and 6 in others. Retracing the whole course wasn’t ideal!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 23:03:52 GMT -5
Yeah or if you have it where the data itself for some reason is like 2m out in some places, 1m in some, and >2 in others. That's when I go for the greens as the main feature for shift and then move the bunkers manually in OSM. Ideally you never encounter something like that, but such is life  |
|
