Structure Source for NJ Boyd Topo

[SuperChooch]

As you might have seen in another post I've been gathering history on Hampton and one of the things I have been trying to figure out is: what structures were present during which eras. (I.e. pre-iron age, iron age, cranberry era, etc). I came across these structures in your NJ Boyd Topo:

boydsmaps.com

boydsmaps.com

I know the big one is the remains of the packing house so I know the era for that one, but wondering about the rest. What is the source for the structures in that map?

Using your split map feature, and lining the 2017 S NJ Boyd Topo up against the 1949 S NJ USGS Topo, I can there there are some structures in the 1949 Topo, but aside from the packing house being in common, the rest seems to be somewhat different:

Map Sync

boydsmaps.com

Comparing the Boyd Topo to the USGS 24k Legacy Topo, you can see a couple of the structures in common:

Map Sync

boydsmaps.com

I feel like I remember you talking about this in the past (that you maybe merged in structures from multiple sources?) but I couldn't find the post.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Boyd]

Clicking the mapinfo button (looks like a little document) will show you the data sources that were used. That 2017 topo is getting old and has lots of issues. It will be retired as soon as I get a chance to make a light-themed version of the 2020 map, so I'm not really supporting it anymore. But here's a snip from the map info

Here's the info from the 2020 topo. As you can see, there are almost 3,000 more historical building locations on this new map. I'd suggest that you use this map instead. It includes all the historical buildings from the 2017 topo plus so much more.

As far as those exact buldings, I don't really know offhand. If you don't see them on the vintage topo maps, aerials or LIDAR on my site then they might be something I saw on that historic aerials website?

 

[Boyd]

they might be something I saw on that historic aerials website?

Dug out the backup drive where I have the 2017 topo data archived. That's it, they are from the 1940 aerials from Historic Aerials. That imagery is strikingly clear, guessing you have not seen it? I don't think it's possible to link to locations on that site, and there was some controversy about posting screenshots from there in the past, so I'll just leave this as an exercise for you.

Really wish there was another source for this vintage imagery, but I've been unable to find it. Purchased a small section of imagery from Historic Aerials for a personal project a number of years back and was happy with it. However, the cost of buying imagery for the entire Pines from them would be astronomical.

 

[stiltzkin]

Why is your 2020 topo dark themed, anyway - just to distinguish it more from the 2017 version?

 

[Boyd]

Well, I just wanted to do a dark-themed map. Garmin's format lets you have day and night themes for the same map and I set my GPS to night mode all the time, but for a web map I actually have to make individual maps. So this one is dark to match the dark theme of the web app. I like using it at night in the car, also on a computer in a dimly-lit room. And aside from that....

 

[stiltzkin]

I guess I might also ask, while we're on the subject: do you know the source of the photo sets they're offering for some of the layers at Historic Aerials? The 1940 one you mentioned, for example. They don't seem to cite what it is based on anywhere or provide any information. Some people asking in the forums for imagery dates have been told that even that information is only shown after making a purchase.

Also, someone else asking about a similar topic on their forum received a rather hostile response.

I've used their site for a long time (until I found yours, which is much nicer!) but their exorbitant fees and general attitude are off-putting.

 

[Boyd]

I don't know their source. The USGS had something called NAPP (the National Aerial Photography Program) that could be the source, some of it is available from the USGS, but nothing interesting for the Pines, I looked pretty recently. Maybe Historic Aerials bought hard copy sets of the imagery and scanned themselves? The owner actually registered here many years ago and made a point about how expensive it is to georeference large amounts of imagery. I think some of that discussion got contentious and is probably better forgotten.

If you want to look at the NAPP and other imagery, click the Aerial Imagery heading here (let me know if you find anything).

EarthExplorer

Query and order satellite images, aerial photographs, and cartographic products through the U.S. Geological Survey

earthexplorer.usgs.gov

A few years ago I dug deep and only found some un-processed aerial plates from the 1990's. They were interesting, it was like the film directly from the camera without cropping, georeferencing or anything. Would have been a lot of work to process and probably not as good as the full 1990's datasets we already have. If there was 50's or 60's imagery, that would have been worth the effort, but I couldn't find any.

As for that forum post... it's their business and I don't have a problem with them running it the way they do. I'm no lawyer, but believe he is correct about being able to copyright public imagery like the USGS Topos. The fact that the imagery is in the public domain literally means that you can do whatever you want with it. Not very impressed with the way he responded to that question however.

Like I said, I purchased imagery from them somewhere around 2008 for a personal project. It was just a small area and the price seemed reasonable. When I had a question I got a quick reply. So I was satisfied. I recently wondered if it would be practical to purchase full sets of imagery of the pines and had a look at their pricing. It would be completely impractical, (from what I can tell) they only sell imagery in bite-sized chunks and IIRC it would take hundreds just to cover South Jersey. I mean, if I could pick up the full 1960's aerials (for example) for a hundred bucks then I'd do it. Not gonna happen though.

 

[stiltzkin]

As for that forum post... it's their business and I don't have a problem with them running it the way they do. I'm no lawyer, but believe he is correct about being able to copyright public imagery like the USGS Topos. The fact that the imagery is in the public domain literally means that you can do whatever you want with it. Not very impressed with the way he responded to that question however.

Yeah, it's not about the legality of what they're doing, I don't think there's any issue there; they could simply be nicer about it.

Will check out that USGS link, thanks.

 

[bobpbx]

I've used their site for a long time (until I found yours, which is much nicer!) but their exorbitant fees and general attitude are off-putting.

Yeah, Boyd's is free, but it does come with some attitude, which I overlook because the product is so good.

 

[SuperChooch]

Clicking the mapinfo button (looks like a little document) will show you the data sources that were used. That 2017 topo is getting old and has lots of issues. It will be retired as soon as I get a chance to make a light-themed version of the 2020 map, so I'm not really supporting it anymore. But here's a snip from the map info

View attachment 18770

Here's the info from the 2020 topo. As you can see, there are almost 3,000 more historical building locations on this new map. I'd suggest that you use this map instead. It includes all the historical buildings from the 2017 topo plus so much more.

View attachment 18771

As far as those exact buldings, I don't really know offhand. If you don't see them on the vintage topo maps, aerials or LIDAR on my site then they might be something I saw on that historic aerials website?

Thanks! You hand traced them! I’m even more impressed. Yes, I I preferred the light theme and that is why I was looking at the 2017 vs 2020, but I’ll use 2020 from now on.

 

[SuperChooch]

Dug out the backup drive where I have the 2017 topo data archived. That's it, they are from the 1940 aerials from Historic Aerials. That imagery is strikingly clear, guessing you have not seen it? I don't think it's possible to link to locations on that site, and there was some controversy about posting screenshots from there in the past, so I'll just leave this as an exercise for you.

Really wish there was another source for this vintage imagery, but I've been unable to find it. Purchased a small section of imagery from Historic Aerials for a personal project a number of years back and was happy with it. However, the cost of buying imagery for the entire Pines from them would be astronomical.

I had not seen this before, no! You’re right, it is strikingly clear. It is all there in 1940 and all gone by 1951. It answers some questions, but then prompts some more for me to run down! Great stuff.