A smaller patch today, adding most of what's left of Brazil, with just Rio Grande do Sul to go. I know I said I might end up doing a bigger South America patch, but in practice things didn't pan out that way as I had a hectic week IRL last week. Next up, more of Nunavut, adding most of the Nunavut mainland and a few more of the islands. It may only take a fortnight, but as Baffin island proved it could take over a month, so don't be surprised if there's a long wait for the next patch.
But first, some replies, as I haven't done one of these in a while;
I have a question about QBAM and R-QBAM:
Does the western boundary on the map coincide with the US-Russia maritime border in Alaska (-168.976944 W - 180 = -11.023056 E)? Or is it another number?
Just to clear up the little debate that kicked off in early December, the R-QBAM is centred right on the 10th meridian east as
@Rac98 confirmed. Not slightly to the side as it appears you've assumed but dead on the 10th meridian. Yes, this means a handful of pixels of the Russian far east end up cut off in the western hemisphere of the map, but that's a price I'm willing to pay. It's impossible to thread the needle perfectly, so why bother getting it slightly less imperfect when a round number only a little worse will do just as nicely. It's just easier and more convenient to work with a round number - plenty of mapping services, G.Projector in particular, have trouble importing maps that are centred on an unusually precise meridian. Also, I have reason to believe that the classic QBAM is centred on the 10th meridian too, which I decided to follow as a nod to the original. I won't get into how I know that it's centred on the 10th meridian as it's fiddly, and would take a bit of time and a couple of diagrams to explain, but I have my reasons.
Hey everyone - here's an update with some corrections that folks kindly offered up and a few more countries worked on.
I know this is about a month late, but I have plenty of old historical maps lying around on my hard-drive from when I made the 1929 map, so if you need some extra sources I'll be happy to send you them. Aside from that, looks like things are coming along well.
Uh... I have to apologize over my comments about North Greenland.
Apparently, most if not all NASA-based maps are wrong. So are ESA maps. Funnily enough, the most accurate source about polar regions might be Bing Maps satellite imagery.
About how I have reached this conclusion... I basically took a few research stations' (those in North Greenland, Svalbard and Franz Josef Land mainly) coordinates, put them in a file I had with rasters of all three sources, and I have observed that most of the coastal stations were underwater in NASA's map, ESA had issues with Greenland and a few Antarctic islands, and the most accurate one was Bing out of everything I have tested.
I have compared the maps with my eyes as well, most issues appear to arise from incorrect projections of satellite imagery into a map.
Anyway, TLDR; use Bing maps if you want, as NASA is the least accurate among NASA, ESA and Bing.
Yup. When it comes to the polar regions, poor-quality data combined with sometimes incorrectly applied projection distortion leads to some of the messiest conflicting datasets. The best trick I've found is to check as many datasets as possible and compare them to find the better ones. As I've said before, I'm currently using
this map, with the ESA 2020 land-cover data overlaid (you can find it by searching for it in the 'add layer' tab, though it can be a bit finicky and sometimes doesn't work that well the first time you try to apply it).
Do you use Q-GIS in doing this and if so, what tutorials would you recommend to someone trying to do a rough 26 metres drop map in Jaredia orientation?.
I used GIS a little bit while working on British Columbia before I discovered a better source, but to be honest, I didn't get very far with it. I was using
this tutorial, if it helps.
Do you plan to finish every country's subdivisions after R-QBAM finishes?
Eventually yes. I want to finish the main map first however before moving on to that.
Good luck with the Glacial Mandelbrot Set that is northern Canada
Slowly but surely it's coming along. I think I'm about two thirds of the way through Canada by now, so if previous rates of progress hold then I should be done with North America in a few months, as long as nothing goes terribly wrong. It'll be a relief when its done, I'll tell you that.
Oh well, @Tanystropheus42 you beat me on doing the first post of 2024 here by some hours, unfair...
Jokes aside, jeez Canada is indeed annoying, cartographically speaking, but yeah ngl the rivers got me an nasty burnout there, however they are indeed still in production. So twoo things I was hoping to happen try to get a better view of of the region, my main source for rivers, the HydroRIVERS from HydroSHEDS v1 was suppoused to get a new v2 version if significant improvement for artic area data (stuff like actually getting river paths above 60°N right) somewhere in 2023... Well that didn't happened, so that was a bummer, I still can use the v1 supposedly whitout problems until I try get stuff beyond 60°N (in wich case triple checking isn't that fun you know) but I wished that wasn't a thing to still be worried about by now; the other more productive thing I was doing in the meanwhile was messing with QGIS to just do a Robison proj. directly on my source in order to not deal with so much distortion around Canada. In that I actually updated my QGIS version and notice funny thing... A thing that I knew was a thing possible to do before but never actually done it because I'm a noob in that, but now all of sudden, I finally manage to do it, like for real and that was a amazing news. So what I done is this:
Good to hear progress is being made and I completely understand the slow pace. Trying to map Canada is a long, intensive, painful process, so I get that it takes time and that burnout is an ever-present concern. If you're feeling burnt-out, why not do what I've been doing and do something else for a bit when Canada gets too much? I've added a substantial chunk of South America in the meantime, and I'm sure it's not as annoying as Canada can get.
On the OSM maps, they're good, useful resources that you've produced, and I'll be using them as a reference from now on, but bear in mind problems and biases with sources. While OSM is generally one of the better sources out there, as
@Altaic notes, it can be pretty badly wrong in places. One of the worst examples is (surprise, surprise) northern Canada, where coverage of a lot of the small-to-mid sized lakes is spotty to non-existent. Just to take one example,
this rectangular patch of northern Manitoba has been done at a reasonable level of detail, but everything else around it left blank and undeveloped, making the whole thing look like a Minecraft chunk-error IRL. There are other examples, for example
here in Quebec and
here and
here where the ice sheets of Baffin island are cut-off as if sliced by a knife. Good source, but be aware of its pitfalls.
Good luck with further progress on the rivers patch.
With all that wrapped up, on to the patch.
Patch 106 - Brazil 5;
- Added Sao Paulo
- Added Mato Grosso do Sul
- Added Parana
- Added Santa Catarina
- Added Acre.