![]() If you want more information, Google explains how they build their maps with such attention to detail. It’s the side-angle cameras that paint the texture along the sides of mountains and building walls. When you have overlap, photogrammetry pulls all the photos together in a textured 3D mesh. Instead, it uses planes that zig-zag back and forth. Google Earth doesn’t use satellite imagery for this process. AUTOMATED PHOTOGRAMMETRY: The only answer for Google Earth was to create automated 3D models with stereophotogrammetry.Think about the time and effort it would take to create millions of high-rise buildings across the world. The biggest downfall was that SketchUp was a manual process. But users can’t submit their 3D models to Google Earth anymore. They started giving the software away free. SKETCHUP 3D MODELS: In the past, most of Google Earth’s 3D models were created from SketchUp.It has everything you’d expect to visit there like the towering granite monoliths, deep valleys, and ancient giant sequoias.īut how are 3D buildings and landscapes generated in Google Earth? It’s actually a combination of two types of 3D feature types: Yosemite is an example of the amount of detail that a photogrammetric mesh can capture. The architecture in cityscapes shows bridges, towers, monuments, and even rollercoasters. To see all of the globe, you have to rotate it to see all of our new map, you simply have to flip it over.Almost in a league of its own, Google Earth has mind-blowing detail in its 3D maps. "Our map is actually more like the globe than other flat maps. "This is a map you can hold in your hand," Gott said. The new model overcomes this difficulty too and is arguably even easier to handle than globes. However they present ergonomic and production issues because they are harder to make, store and handle. One suggested use was to stick the two sides together like a vinyl record to create a single, double-sided circle.ģD globes of Earth, such as the end result of Fuller's dymaxion map, are closer to the reality of how our near-spherical planet actually is. On their own scale the new map scored a record-breaking 0.881. It scored over 15 on the Goldberg-Gott scale.īy using two circles instead of a stretched, single image, Gott, Goldberg and Vanderbrei were able to avoid many of these distortions and produce a more accurate flat map of the Earth. In its 2D form the map divided up the continents far away from each other. However it exaggerated Antarctica and the distances between East Asia and North America, giving it a score of 4.563.Īmerican architect and inventor Buckminster Fuller's 'dymaxion' world map used a polyhedral net intended to be built as a 3D globe. The Winkel Tripel projection used an oblong shape with less distortions than the Mercator map. The well-known Mercator projection, which created a square map of the world by stretching the polar regions, received a score of 8.296 on their scale. The lower the score, the better the map, with a score of 0 being perfect. ![]() In 2007 Gott and Goldberg created a ranking system that gave every 2D map of the Earth a score for its accuracy based on how much it distorted key elements like distances and area. The new map is the latest example of years of research and critique by Gott and his colleagues on existing 2D maps of Earth. ![]() "We believe it is the most accurate flat map of Earth yet," they wrote in the study. The group published their efforts on the pre-print open access repository arXiv. Gott was joined by Princeton mathematician Robert Vanderbrei and physicist David Goldberg from Drexel University in Philadelphia to create the map. Gott, Vanderbei and Goldberg/Princeton University The group said they believed it was the most accurate 2-D map of the Earth ever produced. Richard Gott, Robert Vanderbei and David Goldberg. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |