BirdsEye Satelite Imagery fault

- Does using the alternative sources you mention (OSM/GEarth) really work?

Absolutely. People have been making them from captures from Google and other online map displays as well as scans from paper maps since long before Garmin introduced raster display on a few of their devices. DeLorme was way ahead of Garmin on that feature and PC navigation programs like OZIExplorer were doing it long before that.

- Is it relatively pain-free to convert and transfer this imagery onto the GPS device? - do you use OZI Explorer maps to do this (I've never heard of it before)

That depends on what software you choose to use. I was playing with Fugawi a few years back - before Google Maps - and it was pretty simple. I could just scan a paper image, load the .JPG file, select some points on the image for calibration and it did the rest.

- Are these custom maps accurate with respect to gps coordinates?

They are as accurate as you make them. .... yeah, that's a dodgy answer :D but it's the truth.

It starts with how accurate your source image is for proportions. If you decide to scan a map that someone has put out there for promotional purposes that has the proportions of some parts of an area all exaggerated for emphasis, like something you might get from a concierge in a hotel to help you find nearby attractions, you won't expect much accuracy. If you scan a quality topo map you can expect excellent accuracy.

But that only gets you half way there.

Then you need a method to calibrate it that is also accurate. That is, you either need some known coordinates on the map so you can tell the calibration software what they are or you need some other method to calibrate the image to a known accurate source. I think some of the calibration software now allows you to use Google Maps as a backdrop that you overlay your raster image onto. Once you have your image overlaid accurately on the Google Maps image (this might sometimes take some "rotating" and "stretching" of your image in various directions to get a good "fit") the software will use the underlying Google Maps coordinates to calibrate your raster imagery.

Like anything worth knowing, there is a learning curve but it's a long ways from being rocket science. It has been around for a long time, so there is good stuff out there to do it and loads of help if you go looking.

...ken...

Garmin products are fantastic purchases - I am delighted with my 550t (It's staying with me), and will certainly consider this company in future purchases. We don't mean or set out to come accross as knocking their hardware!..............

The title of this thread, and I hope, primary comments/discussion, is pretty specific only to the satellite imagery fault.

I decided to post my message when I saw one of the previous messages which recommended to get rid of Garmin GPSes just because of bad quality of BirdsEye (this message was edited) :)

I'm very pleased that you have researched an alternative method and I'll actively look into this now.

I haven't researched anything, I just accidentally came across this in one of the bicycle-related forums. It seems there is a whole BirdsEye-like map making community.

Could you answer a few questions:-
- Does using the alternative sources you mention (OSM/GEarth) really work?

Yes. I've already made a couple of maps from OSM and about five from Google Earth, and used them in one of my bike trips.

- Is it relatively pain-free to convert and transfer this imagery onto the GPS device? - do you use OZI Explorer maps to do this (I've never heard of it before)

The map making is not as easy as in BaseCamp, and it requires several utilities - at least one to download the images, and one more to convert the images to JNX map file.
I really hope that either someone will make a single, easy to use application for this someday, or, which would be much better, BaseCamp will allow to use our own raster maps to generate the JNX maps and upload them into GPS devices.

As for the OZI Explorer maps, there's a lot of freely available scanned maps of Russia in OZI Explorer format. I've tried to use several of them, but unfortunately they appeared to be too inaccurate and outdated.

- Are these custom maps accurate with respect to gps coordinates?

As KGANSHIRT already said. the accuracy of the maps depends only on the accuracy of geo-referencing of the source maps.
For the satellite maps, the deviation is about several meters. While for the scanned maps in OZI format I've mentioned it's up to 100 meters.

I see Google have recently restricted downloadable content via other software.

The last time I made the maps from Google Earth was about two months ago. So, it's quite possible that you are right.

Thanks for your detailed responses – much appreciated!

When I get some free time I will definitely be checking this out. As I said earlier, there’s no perfect imagery source and so to overcome low quality or obstructed imagery (cloud cover, etc) we will all need to learn how to do this.
It may be that this will become more difficult as time goes on and sources become reduced as companies restrict ‘free’ content. I bought and installed several UK Ordnance Survey maps from Garmin on my device – they are an excellent option - though, with the ease of use and highly zoom-able content from free satellite sources (primarily Google), it would be very beneficial to have access to imagery of this standard within our GPSes.
It would be great if Garmin could secure a license from Google. Within reason, we will pay more but we’ll be confident of the end result …..

……Any chance of this in the near future, Garmin?

Looking through my crystal ball, I am almost certain that Google will be seriously considering releasing their own GPS device. If there really is nothing major stopping them doing this (apart from potential Monopolies Commission issues, I think they have the funds for this!!) then I can see big problems ahead for the competition. However, as above, hopefully they will allow licenses to GPS manufacturers/Garmin. Their hands shouldn't be tied since their content is freely available from the internet / in the public domain.

Who knows, maybe the current data provider/license will start to deliver consistent results. In an ideal world, the user would have the option to download content from more than one source through choices made in one user interface e.g. Basecamp? – allowing the user to construct the perfect imagery - easily!.....Nice!

Anyway….back to checking the alternative sources & methods mentioned earlier.
….Bill

I don't think we are going to get Birdseye fixed by whining about it here. Everyone who is dissatisfied with the way it works should open a support ticket with Garmin. I just did. Perhaps if enough people do, it will get some attention from Garmin.

It seems to be working correctly now, but still limits you to 232MB per download. That's an itty-bitty little spec of California. I doubt I'd live long enough to download a significant chunk.

Ok, works fine now, 232MB limits 15000 something images, great.
Manny thanks from the Netherlands :D

After downloading two areas, one in the netherlands and one in greece I see this on the screen of the 78s



I deleted those two areas from the gps but I still see the birdseye in this way.
Problem is that I also recently updated to 3.01 and 3.02.

I wil try too downgrade to 3.00 and see what happens.

Nothing's Fixed

I use Oregon 450, latest BaseCamp, latest software update. Have similar issue with Birdseye (recently signed up unfortunately, should have read this thread first).
I chose an image to download in highest setting, adjust the size so it is within the limit that's set by BaseCamp at about 230Mb. Then download takes ages (Maybe time to switch from dial up to cable ha Garmin?) And the final image is twice as small in size.
E.g. Just done Port Chalmers, Dunedin, New Zealand. 234 square km, when adjusting the area BaseCamp showed 227Mb size. Downloaded in like an hour (I'm on 100Mb/s) and the image size is 129.7Mb. Quality is obviously absolute rubbish- about 50% worst then Google Earth (which is a FREE product by the way) 2009 images for the same area.
Same problems were happening when doing area around Lake Manapouri S.I. New Zealand. Choose 225 Mb area, downloaded image is 113 Mb, and 70% worst then Google’s old 2008!!! imagery for the same area.
I take it if you are going to charge money for the product then it better be working. Problems we all are having now must then be fixed during the beta developing period, while this software is free for the users that agree to participate in testing. I think this is the stage where this soft is at now- the only problem is that we all paid money for it... :mad:

UPDATE: Just done the same area around the port but a smaller size peace to see if that would solve the problem as suggested earlier in the thread. An area of 74 square km was suppose to take 71Mb in highest setting according to BaseCamp, well after downloading the resulting image was 43.2Mb, and the quality- well you know the story...

After downloading two areas, one in the netherlands and one in greece I see this on the screen of the 78s



I deleted those two areas from the gps but I still see the birdseye in this way.
Problem is that I also recently updated to 3.01 and 3.02.

I wil try too downgrade to 3.00 and see what happens.

Downgraded to 2.95beta, upgrade to 3.00 with webupdater, upgrade to 3.01beta everything is fine, then upgraded to 3.02beta and bingo.

So I think the 3.02beta is the cause of the messed up birdseye images on my GPSmap78s

Anyone knows any news on the problem? I got to tell you Garmin support has not been very supportive. I lodged a ticket, explaining what the problem was. And they responded with a message that I should call them...