Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forums Search:  


Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - fo0bar

Pages: [1]
1
This is right, Boyd - multiple maps of the same drawpriority is the issue. Though after much experimentation, and reading about the TYP format, I've come to the conclusion that the draworders are not 'grouped' into drawpriorities, and it would probably just be bad practice to use the same drawpriorities across multiple IMG's. I'm just going to use unique drawpriorities per map to make sure it's reliable.

In regards to the basemap thing, it's only on basecamp, and nothing seems off on the etrex at all. Would it be possible to ask you (or anyone really) to generate a map, with a single polygon anywhere in the world and a custom TYP for that poly, and upload so that I can test it on my basecamp? This would help me figure out if it's something I'm doing wrong...

2
Thanks eaparks, this is pretty much exactly what I'm doing!

Both the permitted and non-permitted areas are either red or green - semi-transparent by alternating pixels on every second row. They've also got 2px polyline perimeters. Right now I've got them using different drawpriorities (permitted=14, nonpermitted=15), but as they're both the same category of 'permit', I would like them to be the same drawpriority, but use different draworders - all while keeping them in separate IMG's.

I just need to keep the drawpriorities as condensed as possible due to the sheer number of separate maps I'll be creating/using. I have a feeling this is inherently impossible/unreliable due to the fact the TYP draworders will default to the next-lowest-available if a draworder is skipped within the typ. I think I'm going to have to settle with using different drawpriorities for that one. No biggie.

I've been having issues getting my polygons to display above the land of the basemap, but below its roads/points/water - I've resigned to the fact my polygons are stuck on top of the basemap due to my assumption of one-by-one nature of processing drawpriorities, but seeing your screenshot with the water on top, I was wondering if you might be familiar with doing this, or if the water is part of your own map?

Thanks!

3
sorry, I did mud up what I was saying - yeah I have been testing with all sorts of drawpriorities, and then tried setting the drawpriorities to 0, 1, 10, 15 and then experimenting with the draworders.

One thing you'll likely know that would save me a lot of time testing and I haven't been able to find a concrete answer for - are draw orders specific to maps, or drawprorities? For instance, if I have 3 separate maps loaded, each with drawpriority 15, and inside those individual maps are single typ's with draworders 1, 2, and 3, will each of those draworders get bundled in with the "drawpriority 15 render" and then sort each draworder within DP15, or does the GPSr just 'get to' drawpriority 15, and then process each IMG discretely (ordered by filename/id/otherVariable) ?

I ask because one of my maps is "permitted areas", and another one is "nonpermitted areas". Some of them overlap and I want to ensure the "nonpermitted areas" are always drawn on top of any "permitted areas" - but I need to keep them in separate maps.

4
Ah, yeah I might have to look into the jnx file thing when I get to that - the etrex really is limited. I'll probably give it a shot with some raster paper maps of some localised areas first before going large on the state surveys :)

I've now got my drawpriority set to 10 (renders it under the DEM shading) for this particular map. I did try 0 through 10 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and more but it seemed to make zero difference. The basemap IMG does have a drawpriority of 0, and internally the ocean's drawpriority is 3. I also tried a few drawpriorities specific to the polygons within the TYP files between 0 and 35, but this also made no difference with the basemap.

I'll also add that I'm now using polygon 10f0a and polyline 10e0a, just to eliminate all conflicts as even though I'd fixed up the polygon/water thing, the state boundaries were still conflicting with my custom type and looking a bit fancy.

When using cgpsmapper, I was using a transparent single pixel extended with no label to replace the "small town" or whatever POI it placed at the bottom element, but still didn't like the fact that it was actually there, and the registration message would appear if you moved the cursor near it.. along with the unremovable shareware/copyright messages in the headers.

The no-basemap-polygon thing was also happening with the maps created with cgpsmapper, also MapTk (used just for testing this issue).. After a week of googling all kinds of phrases and coming up with nothing I'm in disbelief this could only be happening to me! ;D

5
Additionally, after taking a look at your "LIDAR in the Pines" page, it looks like a lot of what you've done is going to be what I'm going to be moving on to next with these maps - rather than street and city mapping, these maps are all for geological purposes and I was wondering how I'd be able to achieve various survey imagery overlays very similar to your lidar map... Looks like I'll have some reading to do!

6
Thanks for your reply, Boyd  :)

I think I may have just found a (somewhat hacky feeling) solution - Though I'll answer your questions first and get to that, as you might have a better solution ;)

I was initially using TypEdit to create my TYPs, however I've just found TypViewer which has less limitations, and a more code-based approach. I was initially using cgpsmapper to "build" the maps, however unfortunately the author is no longer around to sell me a non-watermarked copy, and so I hunted around and came across mkgmap which is perfect for me - as a developer I can inspect and debug to understand how it's behaving, and modify/recompile at will.

By "simple maps", I mean DEAD SIMPLE. Certainly not as complex as yours :) Most of these maps are a just single poly type, some are a single poly type and a single polyline type, and one is a single polyline type. The one I'm initially focusing on here is only a 12kb IMG - 7 (~12 hectare) polygons of a few rural properties and their boundaries. While the area covered spans about 1/4 of Queensland, there are only 14 items on the map. Other maps have a lot more polygons with a size of about 300kb, but behave perfectly other than the same issues as I'm mentioning here.

I was using the 0x4a and 0x4b tiles but I'm also no longer bothering with them as they didn't help one bit.

As BaseCamp appears to currently display the custom maps (albeit wierdly) without being installed to the system prior, I'm avoiding installing the maps to the system as this will add another layer of confusion where I feel I'm already so close -
Quote
it shouldn't be hard to accomplish what you want if you set everything up properly
- I'm sure I've just got something wrong, and my TYP is overriding the basemap in BaseCamp...
[edit] if I compile using the --gmapsupp option and NO TYP file at all, the basemap is fixed but I of course have no custom textures/lines.[end edit]
[another edit] Maps with only POI's and a custom TYP cause no problem on BaseCamp whatsoever. I can have as many custom POI's as I want, as long as I have "Show POI ZIP First" disabled (or I get 'ghosted' points at level 0) [end edit]


Through all my trial and error, I've found that it seems to come down to TYP files and drawpriorities. I tried experimenting with all sorts of drawpriorities from 0 to 40 on my own maps, with no luck.


Anyway, here's the solution I've come to in the meantime:
  • Find basemap and TYP files in Basecamp's program folder
  • Use GPSMapedit to find all polygons used in the basemap (only about 12)
  • Add only the relevant polygons' drawpriorities from the BaseCamp TYP to my custom TYP
  • Compile map using --gmapsupp option

After doing this, everything is looking fantastic in BaseCamp! I just don't reeaaaally like how it's achieved, as I'm sure I've got some kind of flag wrong in the IMG filesystem somewhere causing JUST the polygons to be overridden. As a developer I don't feel comfortable redefining things that I haven't overridden - I'd rather find the conflict (if that's the case) and fix my error.

If this is indeed the correct or only solution, this may be why some "premium" maps have a ridiculous number of semmingly unused drawpriorities - perhaps a standardised drawpriority set is required by Garmin to maintain compatibility with other mapsets and basemaps..

Would a custom TYP in your experience normally override BaseCamp's basemap TYP and drop the default drawpriorities? Is this expected behaviour?

Thanks again for your input and assistance!  :D

7
Hi all,

[Firstly sorry if this is a double post, my initial post messed up with the captcha after I edited it and then said I'd already posted it but it never appeared. It was in the wrong board anyway so I hope it just didn't work ::) ]

I've been sending my hair grey and almost lost my mind over this one, testing all different parameters and stuff for the past week and a half...

I've created some simple IMG maps for my Etrex20x using QGIS, GPSMapEdit and mkgmap. I'm using the 'golf course' polygon type as fill, as well as a 'state boundary' polyline for the outlines. My TYP file has custom fill and lines for the type codes I've used, and matching PID & FID unique to this/these map/s.

Everything's working perfectly on the Etrex. All drawpriorities, textures, lines and (where applicable) POIs are displaying with their appropriate custom bitmaps, and nothing is conflicting with the basemap. Absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever on the Etrex. Good to go.

However when in BaseCamp, if I connect the Etrex and display ANY of my maps containing polygons, all oceans and 'major' waters disappear from the map completely, and my TYP files conflict with the basemap (golf courses now have my custom bitmap, state borders have my custom lines, and the ocean/major water thing)... I do still see smaller rivers, streams etc - just no large bodies of water.

I've attempted including the 'default' TYP into my IMG, which made a small area around my polygons show some localised waters and a corner of ocean a few hundred kilometers away on ONE singular zoom level in BaseCamp.  :o This area did not correspond to any "Area of map selection/coverage" polygons. Overall not really much improvement.

The map only covers a small section of my state, completely inland. I just don't understand why the ocean's disappeared! I'm sure I've got something conflicting here but I'm now at my wits end and need help from the pro's  :)

If anyone's experienced this and knows what the problem is, I thank you in advance for any assistance you can offer! :D

Pages: [1]
anything