Putting me on the map
So, everyone knows about Google Maps, right? They put competitors to shame in terms of quick loading, easy navigating, highly legible maps, and the service has been available for a while. What I've just found out about, thanks to a friend and former colleague, is that Google now has satellite photography of many of the same mapped areas...and that the photos are just as easy to navigate (click on the photo and drag it around, then use the + and - icons to zoom in or out) as the maps. This is scary cool.
So, I thought you might like to see the Worldwide Publishing Headquarters for the Fire Ant Gazette, courtesy of Google:
Even though I've decreased the quality of the photo to save download time (here's Google's original photo), I can still identify every home in our neighborhood. The photo was taken sometime last summer (or maybe even two summers back), I'm guessing, because the large pecan tree in our backyard is in full foliage. (The big green blob in the front yard is actually two live oak trees.) Also, although you can't see it in this view, there are several vacant lots to the west upon which newly-constructed homes now rest, which is why I question just how up-to-date this image is.
Nevertheless, it's a wonderful application of technology, shot from 450km overhead, from DigitalGlobe's QuickBird satellite. According to the specs, the satellite's optics have "60cm resolution" (meaning that it can capture objects as small as two feet wide) and can collect 128 gigabits of data per orbit. The satellite collects photos of an additional one million square kilometers each week.
And it gets better (or worse, depending on where your paranoia meter pegs out) with the launch of WorldView within the next year or two, which will orbit at 800km with 50cm resolution.
If nothing else, this should give backyard sunbathers a reason to choose their spots with a little more care.
Technorati tag: Satellite Photography
Well, if nothing else, this could open up some amusing outlets for Photoshop spoofers.
Posted by: Eric at April 7, 2005 07:33 PMThanks Eric that's a great tool......and no I didn't know!
I used to use the old Terra maps. This is sooo much better. I like being able to switch between street maps and satellite. I even checked up on my old house in Dallas. Easily seen with the garage out back and the huge magnolia in the front yard.
I think the Midland satellite must have been taken at least a year ago. There is a lot near me that has two new houses on it now.....the aerial shows it just in "dirt scrapping" condition.
Posted by: Wallace-Midland, Texas at April 7, 2005 11:26 PMI'm thinking it's closer to two years old based on the photo of the courthouse I checked out the other day. The photo shows none of the construction that has gone up around the courthouse in the past couple of years.
Posted by: jen at April 8, 2005 08:59 AMYeah, after consulting with my wife, whose memory is better about such things, we've decided our area's photo is from the summer of 2003.
Wonder how they decide when to update these things?
Posted by: Eric at April 8, 2005 09:04 AMI didn't know about the sat maps! I played with this for over an hour last night. Of course, they don't have this level of magnification for my little town of Goldsmith. But I really like this tool.
I agree that it was the summer of 2003, because all the high school parking lots in Odessa are empty and the two new restaurants near the intersection of Grandview and 42nd are either not there or in the construction phase.
Oh well, I enjoyed it all the same! Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
Katt, we just showed it the site to my father-in-law, who lives in Fort Stockton. As with Goldsmith, the level of magnification for the FS photo isn't the same, but it was still fun to drag it around and identify landmarks.
Posted by: Eric at April 8, 2005 03:06 PMThey don't have higher resolution photos for my neck of the woods. I guess that shows how important rural S.C. is in the satellite industry.
Posted by: bryan at April 8, 2005 04:21 PMBryan, I wonder if that's the satellite owner's call or Google's?
I suspect it's Googles. I'll bet they pay higher licensing fees for the higher resolution images, and so they "manage" their costs by only licensing the metropolitan areas.
It would be interesting to know more about Google's practices in this area.
Posted by: Eric at April 8, 2005 04:55 PMGreat find! And, it was right under our noses, in a figurative sense.
Posted by: George at April 9, 2005 05:11 PMit was right under our noses
;-)
Posted by: Eric at April 9, 2005 07:41 PMAbout the publisher
Random Abbye photos...
Reason #21 to wear shoes in West Texas
From my rooftop, I can see my own mortality
The USPS: We're now 27% more efficient at mangling your mail!
My Favorite Yard Work
Review: The Amazon Kindle
Personal Library Exploration Continues
Tech Support That's Out of This World
Flower and Butterfly
The Season's First Roundup
Recording History
Want a Healthier Mind? Fuggedaboutit!
Redefining a Bust
Thank you...
Farewell to Abbye
The Neighborhood:
West Texas Blogs:
[Midland unless otherwise indicated]
Other Texas Blogs:
The Business:
The Church:
The World:
I'm sure I'm distinguishable from my sweetgum trees, even at low resolution, but I'm not giving up my moments in the sun for some crummy satellite.
Posted by: CGHill at April 7, 2005 07:03 PM