Yep, I just created a "mosaic" of the complete Sabourin River system in Woodland Caribou PP by splicing together a number of captured screen shots.

You can navigate around my click and drag to adjacent areas.

dd

DentonDoc wrote on May 9^th, 2013 at 1:49am:

DD, what do you use for stitching your screenshots together?

For similar stuff in the past, I've occasionally used PTGUI - it's good for some things, but seems to do other unwanted stuff often enough that sometimes it seems more trouble than it's worth.

Lately, I've just been using the "brute force" approach - load a bunch of tif images into Photoshop as separate layers, skew and distort them as necessary to maximize alignment with an underlying topo map layer, then merge the whole bunch into one composite image. That's time-consuming, but at least it gives me full control in keeping the scale consistent with my topo map "projection".

Is Photostitch worth trying? Or Photoshop's built-in stitching algorithm? Or do you have a third, better way that you'd recommend?

Joe_Schmeaux wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 11:59pm:

You are not last, I was behind you!  I noticed PJ's use of an aerial I knew I hadn't seen in a thread yesterday & checked out Bing.
Some of Quetico is nice quality shot in fall color & very low water -- really interesting if you've been there to see the water levels, for instance in Deux River area or Olifaunt.
Some is missing high res.  Some high res is kind of crappy, as is some of the Google maps/Earth stuff.  I think Bing is ahead of Google in Quetico right now.
-Tom

Weird.

It looks like they have (up to) two separate sets of photos: one at Google-res and another at high res, with the software switching between them depending on zoom level. Maybe that's the reason for the brightness change when you zoom in on the link I posted earlier.

I know there are gaps in the data - some areas have no coverage, areas much bigger than the missing section in PJ's screenshot. Apparently Microsoft acquired some 170 terabytes of data in June 2012, so hopefully it's an annual-budget-schedule-driven thing, and they will add another chunk of high-res coverage next month. Don't hold your breath on getting your new car back, though, Bill.

I liked the seasonal difference I saw when I zoomed.

[font=Comic Sans MS][/font]
The hi res areas are a lot better than GE but it looks hit or miss. the difference is stark. check this area:

scottv11 wrote on Jun 14^th, 2013 at 2:04pm:

It should upload now. Try it again.

OK here is the photo I ment to post showing resolution difference

As I looked at other areas I could see what others are saying about big drops in resolution as you pan around. I was sure glad that an area I need to lay out a route in was hi-res.

Magicpaddler wrote on May 13^th, 2013 at 10:18pm:


At my house, there are different cars and structures, showing a 3 to 4 year gap between the highest res and a step lower.  Very spotty.