The Q-BAM Improvement and Core Thread

Rac98

Rac98

I think I ended up expressing myself badly, the coordinates I drew were based on the map width at the poles and the equator from the QBAM centerline knowing that it is ~ 10.44 degrees east of Greenwich, so much so that afterwards having finished making the longitudes I drew the greenwich line in red beside the 10th west meridian; These coordinates are meant to be used specifically in QBAM with the prime meridian being in Oslo, I think I have some blame for the confusion for not indicating this so well in the coordinates.

As for the maps I used above, they are just a quick reference to show that both St. Lawrence and Fiji are not located where supposedly the International Date Line (aka 180 ° in relation to Greenwich, 170.56 ° east in relation to Oslo) passes the coordinates I drew. In those prints by Fiji and Chukotka the red line is the International Date Line meridian.

As for the possibility that the map edges have been artificially sharpened that I mentioned is because of the space in the Bering Strait, I morphed both Chukotka and Alaska as they were in the center of the map to get a better view of that space.

upload_2019-8-2_10-30-51.png
upload_2019-8-2_10-31-29.png


EDIT After seeing Drex's post: The coordinates still fit the map the same way, there is only the question of the height of the map not matching the latitudes, this I had commented when I had posted the coordinates two previous pages
 

Chris S

Neneveh said:
Well, Antarctica is on both edges of the map, as are to a lesser extent Alaska, Hawaii and Kiribati. If the argument for doing something wrong for almost two decades is simply because St. Lawrence Island or Chukchia would be split by the edge, then I would have to say the basis is pretty weak.
Click to expand...

If I remember rightly, putting the meridian where it is (all the way back to the origin of worlda) was precisely so we wouldn't have a bit of Asia snipped off. It made for better usability (for example when filling in a colour for Russia, the far bit by the Bering Straits got included too).



Most people when they look at map already assume that the centerline is the Prime Meridian, and thus would expect some land somewhere to get hacked into two.
Click to expand...


That's a very strong assumption. Because I for one never assumed it was the Prime Meridian (I remembered it wasn't anyway). I think it's far more likely that the average user on this site didn't give a single thought about the centre line being the Prime Meridian or not and just thought of it as merely the centreline. If any thoughts were given to lines of longitude or latitude it was most likely those lines that were used as the basis of borders (original and revised division of the New World between Spain and Portugal, lines used in Canada and the US etc) or the Tropics and Antarctic and Arctic Circles.

.... Even if we dispense with the centerline=Prime Meridian idea and go with 10º44'E, we still have the issue of several landmasses being of kilter. When I did the southern Indian Ocean yesterday, these islands weren't just off by longitude, they were off by latitude as well (which should remain fixed no matter what the centerline is).....
Click to expand...

True. Very much agreed regarding fixing stuff that is at the wrong latitude
 
Neneveh

Neneveh

@Drex BTW, my Southern Indian Ocean patch was off due to what I mistook as the Prime Meridian, so it should be removed the latest version. It just needs to be moved to the left a bit. The size and latitude are accurate.
 
Drex

Drex

Also patched the Lena River, it was awfully wrong. Yakutia's subdivisions are that bad aswell, but I'm not good enough to properly patch them.
upload_2019-8-7_13-53-48.png


EDIT: I tried
upload_2019-8-7_20-51-31.png
 
Last edited:

Sharklord1

East Punjab.png

East Punjab Patch.
I posted this because I have a question about the color scheme for India. Why are they fourth levels and not third levels?
 
Neneveh

Neneveh

I have a question. Since this map has several dried lakebeds that have been deprived of water for thousands of years, would it not also make sense to showcase major shoreline changes since the beginning of the Holocene Era (about 10,000 BCE)? I'm especially thinking about the Black Sea, the Persian Gulf, and Doggerland, not to mention man-made land reclamation such as can be found in the Netherlands.

EDIT: Also, would it not be possible for dried lakebed boundaries to present a different color? I'm thinking the best system would be (in RGB format):

- Ocean/Lake (large bodies of standing water) = 180-220-224
- Sea Ice = 217-133-247
- River (no boundary) = 138-190-226
- Former coastline (including dried lakes) = 202-219-231
 
Last edited:

Sharklord1

Neneveh said:
I have a question. Since this map has several dried lakebeds that have been deprived of water for thousands of years, would it not also make sense to showcase major shoreline changes since the beginning of the Holocene Era (about 10,000 BCE)? I'm especially thinking about the Black Sea, the Persian Gulf, and Doggerland, not to mention man-made land reclamation such as can be found in the Netherlands.

EDIT: Also, would it not be possible for dried lakebed boundaries to present a different color? I'm thinking the best system would be (in RGB format):

- Ocean/Lake (large bodies of standing water) = 180-220-224
- Sea Ice = 217-133-247
- River (no boundary) = 138-190-226
- Former coastline (including dried lakes) = 202-219-231
Click to expand...
Not on this qbam, but definitely on another that would be devoted to those specific changes. The reason of this is because these dry lake-beds still exist in present day, whereas shoreline changes have often changed a lot over the course of thousands of years, and did not continue into the present day. So while I do like that idea, it shouldn't be on this specific qbam but perhaps on another.
Regardless, you could probably post updates of that kind to here or the historical qbam thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top