New Standard Waypoint Icons For OpenCPN - Input Requested

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Moo

You have missed the point entirely. If you move it it will not longer indicate the real position.

Thomas knows what he is talking about

What are we talking about here, a few metres off?
Do you really cut marks that close and is GPS that accurate?

[Moo]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

What are we talking about here, a few metres off?
Do you really cut marks that close and is GPS that accurate?

Still missing the point.

Depends on the scale could be hundreds of metres off.

Yes sometimes you do cut marks that close. Certainly some of the channels that I use the position of the mark on the chart matters.

GPS is that accurate with WAAS or other differential enabled.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Moo

Still missing the point.

Depends on the scale could be hundreds of metres off.

Yes sometimes you do cut marks that close. Certainly some of the channels that I use the position of the mark on the chart matters.
.

I doubt anyone in their right mind would be coming up on marks, especially turning marks, scaled right out.

Scaled in, it will only be meters out, if that.

.
GPS is that accurate with WAAS or other differential enabled

Sometimes yes, many times no.
Crazy to blindly accept it as spot on imho
Approach the mark, reef, bank etc and let brain and eyes take over.

[rgleason]

Standards are standards. OpenCPN tries to comply whenever it is possible. We still need a volunteer to do it.

[Moo]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

I doubt anyone in their right mind would be coming up on marks, especially turning marks, scaled right out.

Scaled in, it will only be meters out, if that.



Sometimes yes, many times no.
Crazy to blindly accept it as spot on imho
Approach the mark, reef, bank etc and let brain and eyes take over.

Your still missing the point.

Making the charting system as accurate as possible is the point. Just fudging it is not OK. When people look at the charts they expect normal conventions to have been followed.

Now can you help?

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Moo

.

Now can you help?

No I cant can you?

. Your still missing the point.

Making the charting system as accurate as possible is the point. Just fudging it is not OK. When people look at the charts they expect normal conventions to have been followed

I don't think I am missing the point at all.
If i understand correctly you want everything to be perfect whereas I realise things are not perfect on the water.

I just dont see the point as just about everywhere we play on the water is forever changing.
Charts show marks that aren't even there because the channels have changed so the marks are moved.
In a few months they will probably change again.

Best I can do is drop a mark on the chart as I go past the new mark and anywhere within 20 feet is near enough as its a guide to get me near next time and then the eyes and sounder tell the true story just like traveling through reef.

Where I am anchored right now in 20 feet of water the chart shows as drying banks.
If I follow the channel on the charts I would be aground.
Having an icon accurate to the nth degree would not save me when the charts are not accurate to begin with.

To the guys doing the work on opencpn I thank you.
Its an amazing bit of kit and you'll get no complaints from me.

[bcn]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

Where I am anchored right now in 20 feet of water the chart shows as drying banks.
If I follow the channel on the charts I would be aground.
Having an icon accurate to the nth degree would not save me when the charts are not accurate to begin with..

That's why a marker should be accurate. You are complaining with reason that your chart is misleading.

Therefore the program shall allow to place a marker in the correct place.
One shall be able to copy the lat/lon from "properties" and say"go to".

If I have to place the marker in a wrong place to get it visually right on the display, this is just not a good idea.
The presentation of vector charts in OCPN is defined by S-57. And one shall be able to trust that it complies with the standard.

Imagine you are running under radar due to poor visibility. You will not want to have the symbol of the buoy on the chart 20m or 50m off to check it against a radar signal.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by bcn

.

Imagine you are running under radar due to poor visibility. You will not want to have the symbol of the buoy on the chart 20m or 50m off to check it against a radar signal.

So an icon being a few meters out at most due to point not being centre but on edge of icon has now grown to 20 to 50m to make your point?

I am not that blasé with my nav to use instruments only and won't come into a dodgy spot without good visibility, to me that is good seamanship.

Over the years I have seen too many boats piled up on the bricks by operators who "blindly" trusted electronics over eyes, to me that is poor seamanship.

Also, there is no way in hell I will use a marks lat long as a go to as I have seen boats wrecked doing that as well.
I always drop a go to a safe distance away.

Maybe I am just being overcautious?

[Moo]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

No I cant can you?



I don't think I am missing the point at all.

I can't help with this particular point, but I do what I can.

As for you missing the point..

Originally Posted by Simi 60

No I cant can you?



I don't think I am missing the point at all.

Yea you are.

If you want to spar with regard to sailing using eyeball pilotage bring it on. Most of my sailing career has been off of existing charts.

This is why a tool such as OCPN is so useful to me. I can make my own charts from satellite photos, my own surveys and soundings and such. I can then share imagery and GPX files with friends and colleagues. It is much better if the marks are correctly displayed to standard standards.

When I make the charts I position the marks precisely. Dropping the marks and then imprecisely dragging them voids the effort. Of course I can live with it but I applaud the efforts to make the marks display correctly. It is one more fudge that I don't have to deal with.

Remember these marks are not those displayed on commercial charts by OCPN but those placed by users, for their own use; which is probably very different from yours.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Moo

Remember these marks are not those displayed on commercial charts by OCPN but those placed by users, for their own use; which is probably very different from yours.

Exactly what I do as well but I still won't blindly trust GPS or radar without an eyeball confirmation.

Like i said, i am not that blase' with nav.
I won't cut rocks, reef, banks and marks with + - 2m distance.
I am not jumping over the side and pushing off a boat that draws 6+ft and weighs 65 tonne.

[pinguino]

Originally Posted by cagney

The Icons introduced in this thread have been very successful.
There are however some small things that needs adjustments.
The upcoming OpenCPN 5.0 release will include heaps of new features, so I feel that now is a good time to raise this question.

There is an international standard for how the IALA A&B marks should be displayed.



So how does it work for the moment in 4.8.8?

We drop a mark
Attachment 183922
Then change the triangle for a cardinal mark.
This looks like
Attachment 183923
The center of the icon is used to mark the position.
According to the standard it should really look like this
Attachment 183924

Is there anyone that is handy with graphical tools and can fix this?
There are about 20 IALA icons to change.

Thomas

Try these ones. Zip file. Rename before use.

[Gruz]

Originally Posted by Moo

I can't help with this particular point, but I do what I can.

As for you missing the point..

Yea you are.

If you want to spar with regard to sailing using eyeball pilotage bring it on. Most of my sailing career has been off of existing charts.

This is why a tool such as OCPN is so useful to me. I can make my own charts from satellite photos, my own surveys and soundings and such. I can then share imagery and GPX files with friends and colleagues. It is much better if the marks are correctly displayed to standard standards.

When I make the charts I position the marks precisely. Dropping the marks and then imprecisely dragging them voids the effort. Of course I can live with it but I applaud the efforts to make the marks display correctly. It is one more fudge that I don't have to deal with.

Remember these marks are not those displayed on commercial charts by OCPN but those placed by users, for their own use; which is probably very different from yours.

For heaven sake why bother, then just go and buy.


C-MAP

[cagney]

Originally Posted by pinguino

Try these ones. Zip file. Rename before use.

Thank you very much pinguino.

I find a clear improvement with your icons compared to the old ones.

But adjustments are still needed. We have Icons 64 x 64 pixels, were the bottom half is transparent. This translates to that the baseline should be at pixel 32. Many of the icons are still to low in the 64 x 64 square.
As an example the Marks-Danger-Topmark has the baseline at pixel 38 instead of 32.

As you understand I'm not a graphical expert, but this is my understanding.

Thomas

[pinguino]

Originally Posted by cagney

Thank you very much pinguino.

I find a clear improvement with your icons compared to the old ones.

But adjustments are still needed. We have Icons 64 x 64 pixels, were the bottom half is transparent. This translates to that the baseline should be at pixel 32. Many of the icons are still to low in the 64 x 64 square.
As an example the Marks-Danger-Topmark has the baseline at pixel 38 instead of 32.

As you understand I'm not a graphical expert, but this is my understanding.

Thomas

Well, I was just on the boat playing with the Rpi and I had to install inkscape and fool around to see what the results were. It was a task of a few minutes.

I will try when I have a little more time to do it at home with the mouse because with the touchpad is difficult to do tasks so delicately.

[pinguino]

I hope these icons are accurate enough.