Sat2Chart

[Wilyum]

Ran in to this error message:

Error: the SasPlanet window has jumped into the foreground.
Cannot continue, please check the SasPlanet window
Error: unable to complete SasPlanet request.
If SasPlanet is in Full Screen Mode, turn it off
Try increasing the Typing Delay in the the Options panel
SasPlanet may need to be restarted.

Does anyone know how to fix it? Restarting does nothing.

[Wilyum]

Originally Posted by Wilyum

Ran in to this error message:

Error: the SasPlanet window has jumped into the foreground.
Cannot continue, please check the SasPlanet window
Error: unable to complete SasPlanet request.
If SasPlanet is in Full Screen Mode, turn it off
Try increasing the Typing Delay in the the Options panel
SasPlanet may need to be restarted.

Does anyone know how to fix it? Restarting does nothing.

Found the problem, google satellite doesn't zoom in far enough in this part of the world, so its not finding the correct zoom level, causing an error.

[Slovak]

Long promised, finally delivered. mbTiles from ArcGIS, Bing, Google, and Navionics for the west coast of US and Canada, zoom 10-18 for all. These were very helpful to navigate the Inside Passage as we spent 7 months cruising to Alaska and back to WA state.

Open to feedback and recommendations to make this page more helpful. I specifically provided the content (mbTiles) and linked to other helpful resources where I've learned much of this dark art. No sense in trying to replicate and repeat what's already great and out there.

https://sailingamazinggrace.com/charts

[Wilyum]

Excellent work, its only a matter on time before the whole planet is available z10 - z18, thanks for sharing.

[phiggins]

Sat2Chart_V16.0.10.4 is bow available: provides support for C-Maps.
You will also need the new version of SasPlanet.
Many thanks to Geoff Roddick and Jon Hacking for bringing this back.

Download links:
https://www.gdayii.ca/Downloads/Sat2...V16.0.10.4.exe
https://www.gdayii.ca/Downloads/Sasplanet.zip

Don't forget to upate the cache link in SasPlanet/Settings/Options

[Miyalk]

Which of the C-Maps do people find compliments Navionics & Nautical Charts (Aus in my case). Looking at them i think it might be the C-Map_DR_HRB_X?

[yachtvalhalla]

Originally Posted by Miyalk

Which of the C-Maps do people find compliments Navionics & Nautical Charts (Aus in my case). Looking at them i think it might be the C-Map_DR_HRB_X?

I agree. Here's Phang Nga Bay in Thailand using that selection

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by Miyalk

Which of the C-Maps do people find compliments Navionics & Nautical Charts (Aus in my case). Looking at them i think it might be the C-Map_DR_HRB_X?

Interesting to hear this, Miyalk. We're trying to decide which of the 14 different types of CMap charts to include in the final release, since 14 is more than most folks want to deal with.

Personally, I'm not a fan of all of the contour lines in the HRB imagery. I find it distracting. But if other users are wanting it, then perhaps we should include it. Please do look at all of the map types carefully to see which you prefer.

I happen to like the Std version, rather than the -X, as I find the colors are more pleasing (to me) & it shades out to 20m, while the -X only shades out to 10m.

[sv_pelagia]

In Northern British Columbia (esp Haida Gwaii), some/many C-Map "high-resolution" charts are based on what CHS explicitly states are NOT-for-navigation soundings (NONNA), with no statement about this. NOT based on official CHS charts (in some places because they do not exist).

I also agree with the comment that there are too many contours to make sense of C-Map high-resolution charts (same issue with Navionic's "sonar" charts).


(I've used SASPLANET/SAT2CHART to place same NONNA10 soundings on satellite images, and my "charts" are much more readable that the C-MAP high-resolution "charts" based on the same soundings.)

[Jon Hacking]

Pelagia, I'm always surprised when folks seem to think that nautical charts are the be-all & end-all of navigational charts. I can show you places where my official, nautical charts are out by a nautical mile. Give me good satellite imagery any day. The nautical charts are good for depths, but in many places, their coastlines are only approximate.

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

Pelagia, I'm always surprised when folks seem to think that nautical charts are the be-all & end-all of navigational charts. I can show you places where my official, nautical charts are out by a nautical mile. Give me good satellite imagery any day. The nautical charts are good for depths, but in many places, their coastlines are only approximate.

"In many places" yes. We certainly found this in Mexico (though it is now improving) and in the past even here in British Columbia.


However, here in Canada we're fortunate as NEW charts here (issued past 10-20 years) do not, for the most part, have this issue. Still, there are older charts here that have real problems (especially in Newfoundland, it seems). Problematic charts are fast disappearing here in British Columbia.

I'll certainly agree that many here in Canada and USA seem to think dangerous rocks have all been discovered and are on the charts ("rocks don't move") when this is definitely NOT the case here in BC.



My point about C-MAP high-resolution "charts" was that they are using "non-navigational" data here without stating so (not that users would notice or pay attention to such a notice).

[yachtvalhalla]

Revised guide to installing Sat2Chart and SasPlanet on a Windows comouterm

[yachtvalhalla]

Bruce from the ChartLocker gave a tip about eliminating the zoom level 17 for charts made using SasPlanet. I did some testing to investigate this using a polygon in Thailand at Phang Nga Bay. I did six charts at zoom level 15-18, three with zoom level 17 and three without.

File sizes without Z17 compared to all were: Bing 82.5%, CMap 76.5% and Yandex 81.8%.

The differences in detail do not seem to my eye to be degraded by eliminating zoom level 17.

Thanks to Bruce for the tip!


Terry

[Jon Hacking]

Terry, you & Bruce (& Sherry) are all concerned about file size. And that's fine. Make your charts the way you want them.

I have a different philosophy, & feel that hard drives are pretty cheap these days. And perhaps more to the point, having all zoom levels means that OpenCPN doesn't have to decide which pixels to display & which to throw out, which seems to impact performance when panning. I'm willing to make the tradeoff of disk-space for speed, but I recognize that others have their own priorities, & that's fine.

In fact, you don't really need ANY zoom levels except Z18. OpenCPN will (eventually) decide which pixels to display & which to throw out, just like it does with KAPs. And that will save you about 33% in file size, if that's important to you.

I found that panning around with KAPs displayed (which only have the one zoom level) to be annoyingly slow (with the hardware available at the time) so I was very grateful to be able to include more zoom levels to increase OpenCPN performance. But I also recognize that I produce pretty large mbTiles that cover a lot of area, & that not everyone feels as I do.

[yachtvalhalla]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

In fact, you don't really need ANY zoom levels except Z18. OpenCPN will (eventually) decide which pixels to display & which to throw out, just like it does with KAPs. And that will save you about 33% in file size, if that's important to you.

Think about what you wrote. For a single chart you wouldn't get much coverage.