Sounding size adjustment on Vector Charts

[rgleason]

I don't believe scaling up the actual raster section for sounding symbols will be possible to do effectively, even if it is done very occasionally during a user setup, to adjust the size to some personnal standard within what ECDIS may accept.
A number of questions come into play such as how is each raster symbol stored? Individually, or by pixel reference in a file? How will the reference technique used interface with an increase in pixels? --But I might be wrong.

See what is involved here.

Enlarge Images Without Losing Quality/Pixelated – 4 Must See Tools
https://www.raymond.cc/blog/how-to-e...-or-pixelated/

Increasing pixel density of sounding symbols with increase rendering time.

Maybe this would work - Resampling - upsampling - or resize.
http://www.icthomework.co.uk/exercis...p%20images.pdf

[RhythmDoctor]

Don't hit a nail with a screwdriver. Switch to a typefont.

[rgleason]

RDr Rick,

I agree, it makes a whole lot of sense to me.
That's the third way to do it.

[HappySeagull]

Originally Posted by P_Dub

There must be a way to modify this, as some company have done it!
Regards

Have you tried to set your Safety depth to 500 metres! They're all black now for me!in BC
you can leave Shallow and Deep wherever you like but keep 4 colours

[P_Dub]

Originally Posted by HappySeagull

Have you tried to set your Safety depth to 500 metres! They're all black now for me!in BC
you can leave Shallow and Deep wherever you like but keep 4 colours

Attachment 94928

That is strange, it was not like that before. Good find.
Regards

[rgleason]

Setting to 4 color is much better. Thanks Happy. Still some adjustment to sounding would be helpful..

1. Use Truetype or other font in lieu of sounding symbols.
2. Option for user adjustment within some predetermined range for ECDIS compliance.
3. Dynamic filtering of soundings when zoomed out.

[P_Dub]

Originally Posted by rgleason

Setting to 4 color is much better. Thanks Happy. Still some adjustment to sounding would be helpful..

1. Use Truetype or other font in lieu of sounding symbols.
2. Option for user adjustment within some predetermined range for ECDIS compliance.
3. Dynamic filtering of soundings when zoomed out.

By altering the way that Happy said, it is great. All is left for some people is trying to increase the symbols font size.
I thing after that all is OK. You would have the best of all the ECDICS program I ever seen.
Regards

[nohal]

Guys...
We talk about ECDIS, so let's bring that thing a bit closer to the reality. I attach an example of the definition of a sounding symbol in the to be released S52 presentation library version 4.0 (not 1980s, the future...)
As you can see, the definition is pretty strict and does not leave much room for thinking and impressions.
The good thing re scaling the symbols is that this new specification replaces the bitmap symbols with vectors and thus lets us scale them as we need.
All that's left is implementing it

Pavel

[P_Dub]

Originally Posted by nohal

Guys...
We talk about ECDIS, so let's bring that thing a bit closer to the reality. I attach an example of the definition of a sounding symbol in the to be released S52 presentation library version 4.0 (not 1980s, the future...)
As you can see, the definition is pretty strict and does not leave much room for thinking and impressions.
The good thing re scaling the symbols is that this new specification replaces the bitmap symbols with vectors and thus lets us scale them as we need.
All that's left is implementing it

Pavel

Lets beat the iron while it's red hot.
Excellent proposition Pavel.
Thanks for that great piece of work.

[wdkester]

Originally Posted by nohal

Guys...
We talk about ECDIS, so let's bring that thing a bit closer to the reality. I attach an example of the definition of a sounding symbol in the to be released S52 presentation library version 4.0 (not 1980s, the future...)
As you can see, the definition is pretty strict and does not leave much room for thinking and impressions.
The good thing re scaling the symbols is that this new specification replaces the bitmap symbols with vectors and thus lets us scale them as we need.
All that's left is implementing it

Pavel

Standard writers are more interested in ship safety than yacht safety. Ships stick to channels, yachts do not. Ships have weather enclosed bridges, yachts seldom do. This may partially explain why many prefer RNC (the good old days with less standards) to ENC.

Lets compare RNC to ENC:

RNC (scale factor 1.0) Depths are smaller but darker than the ENC depths and (very subjectively) are slightly more readable. But zoom to scale factor 1.4 and I think I can read them from 2x as far as the ENC's.

I really would like to use course up and ENC's but not at the expense of legibility.

[nohal]

Dave...
Understood very well. The problem with the ENCs is obvious - they by design target shipping, not boating. Not as visible in the US, but very visible in the rest of the world where they simply "don't care much" about shallow coastal areas far from shipping lanes - the stuff we like the most. My plan for the soundings is to a) switch to the vector symbols from the 4.0 IHO presentation library and b) implement a way to adjust them for legibility. But both need work, testing and more work... You can expect something early in the next beta cycle.

Pavel

[RhythmDoctor]

Originally Posted by wdkester

Standard writers are more interested in ship safety than yacht safety. Ships stick to channels, yachts do not. Ships have weather enclosed bridges, yachts seldom do. This may partially explain why many prefer RNC (the good old days with less standards) to ENC.

Lets compare RNC to ENC:

RNC (scale factor 1.0) Depths are smaller but darker than the ENC depths and (very subjectively) are slightly more readable. But zoom to scale factor 1.4 and I think I can read them from 2x as far as the ENC's.

I really would like to use course up and ENC's but not at the expense of legibility.

I use RNC for planning, and while underway usually switch to ENC in course up mode. I am not sure that fewer standards is the reason to prefer RNCs - actually just the opposite. I generally feel that professional cartographers follow best practices that cause them to make the best prioritization decisions around what to show. If there is too much clutter, they know what is most important to mariners. Whereas on an ENC, it is possible for the user (me) to make poor decisions in hiding stuff that might be important. So for planning I use RNC because I'm confident NOAA knows what's most important in US waters.

As far as legibility of ENC plots while underwar in course up mode, putting the soundings right side up (with OpenGL activated) is a big help. There does need to be improvement in the size adjustment capability, but for now I'm avoiding real high density displays. One thing to consider, if you haven't done it already, is to adjust your depth settings in the vector charts page. This can affect the color scheme of the depth contours. I have it go from light blue to medium blue at the 6' deep contour line, and I just try to stay out of the medium blue areas. My boat draws a little under 4', so I know I'm safe staying outside the 6' contour, and I can see where that is without soundings based strictly on the color. If I'm in a shallow anchorage where everything is under 6', then I have to look closely at the soundings.

[rgleason]

Now that we have SVG icons, can't we have a control that will scale ENC Depth up to something that is comfortable for our eyes? It is too minisule on high res displays!!!

Previously the problem was the use of raster icons.

Should this be made a Tracker Item? Would anyone bother to vote for it?

- Partial Workaround, use 4 color charts and set the color depth.

[bdbcat]

Rick...

SVG icons has nothing to do with ENC soundings.

We use the recommended IHO symbols for soundings. They have "drop shadow", which lets them work on a variety of background colors. The colors (black or gray) are set based on "safety depth". From a purely safety aspect, one cares less about depth as long as it is known to be greater than configured safety depth.

Further, the ENC soundings are designed to scale with the Chart Object slider. Presumably, if you need the soundings bigger, you need the ATONs bigger also.

We could of course make them independently bigger, and change the font entirely. Use TruType "GoofyScript" if we want to. Other ECS implementations do this, with varying quality results. But lets be careful what we ask for whenever we deviate from IHO standards....

Dave

[P_Dub]

Dave, When working on a large scale screen its OK; but on a 15 inch it is barely acceptable for many and it must be too small on smaller screen size.The IHO works always on large screen and they dont seems to care about those that do not have an ECDICS fully compliant size. It is unfortunate way to deal with the problem. Personally I recomand a way to make adjustment.If it is not too complicated this should be done. Thanks in advance.
Regards.