Latest Contributions by LukePettinga

‎07-29-2016

I would like to have a discussion regarding which coordinate system(s) are best, and/or are typically used, for measuring both the lengths and areas of mapped features at various scales, and addressing the specific limitations/cautions/concerns that arise from using any single coordinate system for this type of work. This can range from the simple (ex., geographic vs. projected coordinate system (GCS vs. PCS) to measure area, or selecting an appropriate datum) to the more advanced (ex., when it is appropriate to use (or not use) a projected UTM coordinate system). Impetus: I need to measure both lengths and areas of objects on the scale of 10s to 100s of km across that are located in areas distributed around the globe. In pursuit of developing a simple, efficient, and accurate workflow: I would like to minimize the number of coordinate systems (and conversions between them) that I will need to us to obtain accurate length and area measurements. Is there a single coordinate system that I can use to accurately measure both? Or, will I need to use multiple? What coordinate system(s) are best for this work, and what are their limitations? etc.

‎07-29-2016

Yes! Thanks, Dan.

‎07-29-2016

The prospect of the original map's scale bar being calculated at the equator seems to be a plausible (and likely) cause of the issue. That would explain why: - The original and ArcMap scale bars lengths matched when I used a geographic projection system, and both were incorrect. The "50 km" scale bars were only 34.4 km long. This amount of error would be expected at 47N if they were both sourced at the equator. - And, while using a projected coordinate system, the ArcMap derived scale was correct (50 km = 50 km) and the original maps "50 km" scale bar was still incorrect by the same amount ("50 km" = 34.4 km). On your second comment: Yes, the original image is a bathymetry chart. I think this is the explanation: The original scale bar was incorrect because, while using a geographic coordinate system, they included a scale bar sourced at the equator. Thank you, Melita Kennedy, for providing the answer!

‎07-28-2016

Neil, I did not use the true corner in this example (since, as you pointed out, it does not have a "corner coordinate"). As an alternative, I used the tick mark closest to corner, which is 74.5 degrees N latitude/14 degrees W longitude. The lower right and left corners had labeled coordinates, but I used a similar approachfo the upper right corner, i.e., georeferencing the nearest known point (using a tick mark at 74.5 degrees N latitude/8 degrees W longitude).

‎07-28-2016

You are correct in asking about the coordinate systems of original image; the map is from a published journal article and I am NOT sure what coordinate system was used. It is a smaller map (about 1.5 degrees latitude and 3.5 degrees longitude) which has a graticule that make perfect squares and the conversion from degrees latitude (or longitude) to km match the scale bar (at least before it is georeferenced). As a result, I guessed that it used a GCS. Based on your suggestion, I attempted to georeference the map in a PCS (since I do not know what was used on the original, I used the appropriate UTM zone) using the "Enter DMS" function. This resulted in the same ~30% error in the length of the scale bar with the "Measure" tool. Is it common for scale bars to have this much error (a 50 km scale bar measures 34.4 km, 30% error) when georeferenced?

‎07-27-2016

First, I agree with your point that UTM will distort distance and area. Based on the fact that I will not be measuring areas that extend beyond a single UTM zone (often much smaller and up to a few 100 km), I was considering using a projected UTM for measuring distance and area. Will this method introduce significant error? Second, is there a simple reason why the relationship between the scale bar from the original map and one created in ArcMap changes when using a projected vs. geographic coordinate system? Particularly, an explanation for the irregularities when using the "Measure Tool" to check the scales: How can the ArcMap based scale bar be wrong/inconsistent (measuring 34.4 km in the GCS and 50 km in the PCS) and the scale bar from the georeferenced image be consistent in length (34.4 km in both GCS and PCS) but wrong (should be 50 km) (as illistrated in the images in my previous post)?

‎07-27-2016

No, there is only one data frame.

‎07-27-2016

The first image is the corner of the original map projected using a geographic coordinate system (WGS_1984), which shows how well the map lines up with the lat-long grid. The top "50 km" scale bar (from the original map) matches the lower "50 km" scale bar (created in ArcMap layout view). When I measure them with the Measure Tool they are 34.4 km long. Why would the scale bar (even the one created in ArcMap) not be correct length according to the Measure Tool? The second image is the same map in a projected coordinate system (UGS_1984_UTM_Zone_29N). Now the scale bars are not aligned. Using the Measure Tool the original "50 km" scale bar again measures 34.4 km, while the ArcMap derived "50 km" scale measures 50 km What do I need to do to find an accurate / trustworthy length measurement? And after that what settings can be used to calculate areas?

‎07-27-2016

I will address your questions in order: - The scale bar in question is on the original map. - Yes, I have checked and the georeferenced map with known data (a lat-long grid) and it matches up very well. - The original map does not have a variable scale. It only ranges from 46 to 47.6 degrees latitude; as a result, a 50 km (non-variable) scale bar should only have an inaccuracy of about 1.5 km within the map area. However, I am observing an error of over 15 km.

‎07-27-2016

The map image in question was originally drafted in a geographic coordinate system, but after I geo-referenced it appeared to project correctly in a data frame using a projected UTM coordinate system.

‎07-27-2016

I want to geo-reference a series of map, digitize features using polygons, and calculate accurate area measurements. I encountered the following issue: After georeferencing a map image (.png) using the lat-long posted on the four corners of the map and projecting it using an appropriate UTM projection (WGS_1984_UTM_Zone_29N), I noticed that the scale bar is not accurate (the 50 km scale bar measures 34.4 km on the projected map). However, using the Measure Tool to find the length (in km) of 1 degree of latitde and lengths of 3.5 degrees longitude along both 46 deg. & 47.5 deg. latitude; the measurement results and corresponding errors are listed in the table below: Note the large error from the scale bar (>30% error) and relatively insignificant error on the latitude and longitude measurements (<0.1% error). Questions: 1. Why would the scale bar length be inaccurate (especially when the image lat-long appear to be projected correctly and can be measured accurately in ArcMap)? 2. Is this an error in my geo-referencing? If so, is there a better method for geo-referencing this type of map image? 3. Am I using an incorrect projection? I believe a projected UTM is appropriate for area calculations and should provide accurate length measurement for features located within the UTM zone. Any assistance is appreciated. Thanks!

Online Status	Offline
Date Last Visited	‎11-11-2020 02:25 AM

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by LukePettinga

Measuring lenghts and area, which coordinate system/datum is best?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Re: Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?

Scale bar inaccurate on a projected geo-referenced map image, why?