DEED-MAPPER-USERS-L Archives

Archiver > DEED-MAPPER-USERS > 2008-08 > 1218552272


From: "John B. Robb" <>
Subject: Re: [DMU] Maps
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:44:32 -0400
References: <LLEOLCHBMEBAFFAAMPPOOEEDCNAA.steve.stevens@verizon.net>


I use that method as a check. I have a compass rose which I drop into every
map consisting of a pair of perpendicular axes interesecting at their
midpoints, one N-S, the other E-W. The N pole of the N-S one is the
starting point of the bogus deed plot, and thus alone has a nub which points
north, thus:

Pt N
Ln S; 5280f;
Pt S
Ln N; 2640f;
pt
ln E; 2640f;
pt E
ln W; 5280f;
pt W
ln E; 2640f;


----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Stevens" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:55 AM
Subject: Re: [DMU] Maps


> Which is exactly why I said draw a line equal to the scale of the map and
> size accordingly. If 1"= 13000 ft. and you draw a line 13000 ft and scale
> the map till the two are equal, your pretty darn close. I know some of
> you
> all have to be too darn scientific, but my method works every time.
>
> Regards,
> Steve Stevens
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [mailto:]On Behalf Of John B. Robb
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:27 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DMU] Maps
>
>
> Since the only type of physical maps I have scanned myself from the
> physical
> documents (USGS 7.5" topo maps), and then manipulated with Corel
> PaintshopPro, have scaled correctly when imported into DM, and since I
> have
> complete confidence in the USGS topo map scaling, that implies that the
> published LOC image doesn't correspond to it's actual physical size and
> thus
> doesn't correspond either to the intrinsic map scale. That's something
> for
> everybody to keep in mind when they use that resource, and probably, any
> other digitized map image which they didn't scan themselves.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Martin" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [DMU] Maps
>
>
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 6:29 PM, John B. Robb <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> PaintshopPro reported a 6924K image of 7316x6416 pixels at 200dpi....
>>
>>
>> Well there's the difference--since my software gave the same pixel
>> dimensions but at 150dpi. Unfortunately neither one results in a
>> correctly
>> scaled map, but I did find a good fit by telling DeedMapper that it is
>> just
>> under 300dpi. At 6667 feet/inch and 285 dots/inch everything lines up
>> fairly well.
>>
>> I have no idea why different software reported different resolutions, but
>> I
>> guess I am happy with what I have now...
>>
>> Thanks again for all the help,
>> David
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
>> with the word 'unsubscribe'
>> without
>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without
> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without
> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>

This thread: