I'm still using groundOverlay, but I'm now using the mercator projection of the map to translate my picels to lat longs and it seems to be working well.
Thanks for your help. Jeremy On Oct 16, 12:04 pm, "pamela (Google Employee)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey Jeremy- > > If Marker.icon works for you, then go with it. OverlayBase is a bit > more flexible as you can pick which pane to put it in (i.e. below the > marker pane). > > - pamela > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:17 AM, banksy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Thanks for the response Pamela. > > > I am using GroundOverlay, I'll have a play with OverlayBase and an > > icon on a Marker. > > > A Marker should help because it will just display the icon at it's > > native resolution right? What would OverlayBase offer that would be > > better than GroundOverlay? > > > Cheers > > Jeremy > > > On Oct 14, 5:01 pm, "pamela (Google Employee)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> Hi Jeremy- > > >> Are you using GroundOverlay to overlay the image? Have you thought > >> about using OverlayBase or possibly the icon property of the Marker? > >> You'd have a bit more control if you created your own custom overlay. > > >> - pamela > > >> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 6:36 AM, banksy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > Hi All > > >> > I'm trying to add an image as an overlay. Whereabouts the image goes > >> > is arbitrary but I want to make sure that the image is displayed at > >> > it's native size and not scaled at all. > > >> > The image is 800px wide by 600px high. According to what I can see if > >> > I use zoom level three there will be 8x8 256px tiles covering the > >> > whole world, meaning that the whole world has 2048x2048 pixels. > > >> > So my maths tells me that to determine the latitude that the image > >> > should cover is: > >> > 600/2048 * 180 = 52.7344 > >> > and the longitude is: > >> > 800/2048 * 360 = 148.625 > > >> > So If I overlay my image with bounds of (-26.3672, -70.3125) and > >> > (26.3672, 70.3125) it should be displayed on 800x600 pixels. > > >> > However this isn't right. The longitude looks right, but the latitude > >> > is far too small making the image appear squashed. I thought that > >> > maybe my 180 should have been 360, so I tried that, but that made the > >> > image too high, although not by too much. > > >> > Can anyone tell me where I'm going wrong? > > >> > Cheers > >> > Jeremy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API For Flash" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-api-for-flash?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
