Sounding size adjustment on Vector Charts

[rgleason]

Pavel basically agrees about this and had an idea he intended to implement to fix. Did this get done? I don"t believe so, but I could be wrong about that.

I like the safety contour and do use it but I also want depths to be more visible. First of all gray is not so good for legible. Secondly the size needs adjustments for various screens
I haven't found the current adjustments to be very helpful, but will play with them more.

[rgleason]

Here was an earlier set of ideas.

[rgleason]

Happy Seagull suggested: Setting to 4 color depths (There are 3 user defined depths that can be adjusted for your preferences!)
Still some adjustment to sounding text would be helpful..

This morning I checked my laptop 1990x 1080 15" and compared the depths shown there with my SP33 2160 x 1440 which is on a much smaller display 13" and the difference in size of the text is remarkable. We might as well not have depth soundings on the SP3! And the depth soundings on the Dell Inspiron need to be increased at least 50% to 100% particularly if they stay grey.

I have tried the vector adjustments for zoom scale detail and they do not change or affect the text size at all, that is baked into the programming dependent on zoom level, what I think it does is keep detail showing for longer. (At least my tired old eyes don't see a difference....)

I do think we need an adjustment for this. Both of my machines could use it! Now what happens to the adjustment when I go to a RPI3? I just adjust it back so the much smaller display with less resolution is not overwhelmed.

But by all means keep a stop on the smallest size that meets the ECDIS requirements, so that the depth is never less than what ECDIS requires!


1. Use Truetype or other font in lieu of sounding symbols.
2. Have an option to show all depth soundings in black rather than grey.
3. Option for user adjustment within some predetermined range for ECDIS compliance.
3. Dynamic filtering of soundings when zoomed out.

[bdbcat]

Rick...

All good ideas. This topic makes a great Feature Request. We do need to have a coherent plan for increased pixel density going forward.

But, not happening for upcoming Release of 4.6.x. A bit too late in this current game. We will try to get some focus applied for the next Release, probably happening sometime this fall.

Thanks
Dave

[rgleason]

Dave,
Thanks very much for the encouragement. Hopefully we can get it narrowed down with others input and yours so that the request is coherent and not a jumble technically.

I think we are looking for some User control of size within the max & min limits of ECDIS. I need to find out what ECDIS actually requires first.

[rgleason]

This morning, while struggling with bad internet, I got sidetracked trying to make the Depth Readings larger on my Vector Charts. I am sorry to have to bring this up again, but it really is something that should be addressed. I realize it comes late to the game again, with yet another release being planned.

Of course I started working with the Options > Display > Advanced Tab
"Chart Zoom Scale Weighting" adjustment. I was unable to get the faint grey text much larger than the screenshot, in fact I found that this adjustment does nothing for text size at all. It just adjusts how much detail is shown at different scales.

Now for me there is no way I can see the the Depth notations at this size. The Text is too light grey and the size is totally inadequate. Right now this is a minor aggravation, but if I ever plow into a rock or hummock, I might wish that I could see those Depth notations better, regardless of what ECDIS or any other "official" body might say (xxxx that). There are also "Universal Design Guidelines" for those handicapped (eyesight being one of the handicaps) and those principals which should also apply in this case.

I might add that I have been blessed to have 20/20 eyesight until recently and I can drive without glasses, so I am not that handicapped. This is all to make the point that we need to be able to scale the size of the Depth notations on vector charts.

--So that's my 2 cents.

-- Now back to what I was doing, why can't I bring up the Opencpn Wiki and everyone else in the world can? I've rebooted everything, cleaned caches and still I cannot get this page to load.

[RhythmDoctor]

Rick, I agree with you. But as an interim fix, you might try the Swedish color palette. In addition to better color for land masses, the soundings are black, and no awful drop shadows (IIRC). Not sure if they’re larger, but definitely sharper and much more legible. For the life of me, I can’t accept rendering such critical text in a low contrast grey-on-blue color scheme.

[rgleason]

Good interim alternative. Thanks

[rgleason]

FAQ now has
How are font size of vector chart Depth Soundings adjusted?

Thanks Rhythm Dr, I have tried the Swedish Vector Palette. It is better but still very small. From Bdbcat's advice in Note #74

1. "OpenCPN uses recommended IHO symbols for soundings. They have "drop shadow", which lets them work on a variety of background colors."
2. "ENC soundings are designed to scale with the Chart Object slider. Presumably, if you need the soundings bigger, you need the ATONs bigger also. - [Yes, that's fine]

For Vector Charts, the Depth Soundings size is controlled nicely with the Options > User Interface > Chart Object Scale Slider at the bottom. Setting it between 3 and 5 works. Also it is even better with the Swedish Vector Palette. See screenshot.

For Raster Charts, these charts are not controlled by the Chart Scale Slider (which only works on Vector Charts). However reading the "depth" is much easier because the cartography is much better. See Screenshot

[rgleason]

Dave,

I am wondering now if the scale relationship between the sliding scale and what happens on the chart to the depth soundings and atons could be improved a little, such that there is a little greater range? Thus the Vector Chart Cartography could begin to approach the more legible Raster Cartography.

Basically I think this should be considered a small adjustment rather than a new feature.