Re: [OSM-talk] Microsoft Buildings vs. OpenStreetMap visualization
As far as I know, the "Bing Only" layer in the comparison tool represents the vector data that Microsoft has made available here: https://github.com/Microsoft/USBuildingFootprints My experience has been that about 50% of the Bing buildings are rotated to an incorrect orientation. In other rare cases it mapped the various puddles on a flat roof as separate buildings. So I personally would not use the Bing data as it is too inaccurate. As far as the comparison tool - it looks great! But I did notice that it failed to recognize buildings that exist in OSM as multipolygon relations. I already sent feedback to the tool developer about this. -Rassilon On 8/5/2019 8:58 AM, Dave F via talk wrote: Hi Is the 'Bing only' vector? On 02/08/2019 12:24, Darafei "Kom??pa" Praliaskouski wrote: Hi, Here's a demo by azavea showing how 125 Million AI-mapped buildings relate to 33 Million buildings currently in OpenStreetMap in the same region. https://demos.azavea.com/building-footprint-comparison/#4.4/38.67/-93.93 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Microsoft Buildings vs. OpenStreetMap visualization
Hi Is the 'Bing only' vector? On 02/08/2019 12:24, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote: Hi, Here's a demo by azavea showing how 125 Million AI-mapped buildings relate to 33 Million buildings currently in OpenStreetMap in the same region. https://demos.azavea.com/building-footprint-comparison/#4.4/38.67/-93.93 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Microsoft Buildings vs. OpenStreetMap visualization
While you observe quality problems with imports, you can contribute to better document these problems with samples of buildings ( list of osm_id and brief description of observations ). Pierre Le vendredi 2 août 2019 23 h 34 min 17 s UTC−4, AntiCompositeNumber a écrit : In my area, it also appears that the detection rate is fairly good. In my brief look through I found one building where there is no building and a few buildings that the AI did not find. The rotation issue was fairly common as well as a general offset from the imagery (This may be on the Mapbox side, I don't know). The footprints get the general shape of the building mostly there, but struggle with smaller sections. Overall, the tool seems to be good at saying "There is a building here and it's about this big" but is less successful at identifying the details of the buildings. On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 8:17 PM Jmapb wrote: > > On 8/2/2019 7:24 AM, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote: > > Here's a demo by azavea showing how 125 Million AI-mapped buildings > > relate to 33 Million buildings currently in OpenStreetMap in the same > > region. > > > > https://demos.azavea.com/building-footprint-comparison/#4.4/38.67/-93.93 > > Thanks, this is interesting. > > Browsing the areas I'm most familiar with in NYC (where we had a > building footprint import from city data in 2013), I find that the > buildings that are detected by Microsoft but missing from OSM are mostly > either already demolished buildings (currently mapped as > landuse=construction), small outbuildings, or simply nonexistent. In the > cemetery, Microsoft has picked out a few of the more impressive tombs > and mausoleums. And in one case Azavea seems to have failed to notice a > building that's been mapped in OSM for years (since the import.) > > Browsing more rural areas in upstate NY, I see thousands of unmapped > buildings, mostly houses, that Microsoft successfully detected -- in > some cases despite tree cover. The sizes are pretty good and the > footprints are okayish. Oddly some of them seem slightly rotated, maybe > a trick of the shadows. > > J > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Microsoft Buildings vs. OpenStreetMap visualization
In my area, it also appears that the detection rate is fairly good. In my brief look through I found one building where there is no building and a few buildings that the AI did not find. The rotation issue was fairly common as well as a general offset from the imagery (This may be on the Mapbox side, I don't know). The footprints get the general shape of the building mostly there, but struggle with smaller sections. Overall, the tool seems to be good at saying "There is a building here and it's about this big" but is less successful at identifying the details of the buildings. On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 8:17 PM Jmapb wrote: > > On 8/2/2019 7:24 AM, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote: > > Here's a demo by azavea showing how 125 Million AI-mapped buildings > > relate to 33 Million buildings currently in OpenStreetMap in the same > > region. > > > > https://demos.azavea.com/building-footprint-comparison/#4.4/38.67/-93.93 > > Thanks, this is interesting. > > Browsing the areas I'm most familiar with in NYC (where we had a > building footprint import from city data in 2013), I find that the > buildings that are detected by Microsoft but missing from OSM are mostly > either already demolished buildings (currently mapped as > landuse=construction), small outbuildings, or simply nonexistent. In the > cemetery, Microsoft has picked out a few of the more impressive tombs > and mausoleums. And in one case Azavea seems to have failed to notice a > building that's been mapped in OSM for years (since the import.) > > Browsing more rural areas in upstate NY, I see thousands of unmapped > buildings, mostly houses, that Microsoft successfully detected -- in > some cases despite tree cover. The sizes are pretty good and the > footprints are okayish. Oddly some of them seem slightly rotated, maybe > a trick of the shadows. > > J > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Microsoft Buildings vs. OpenStreetMap visualization
On 8/2/2019 7:24 AM, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote: Here's a demo by azavea showing how 125 Million AI-mapped buildings relate to 33 Million buildings currently in OpenStreetMap in the same region. https://demos.azavea.com/building-footprint-comparison/#4.4/38.67/-93.93 Thanks, this is interesting. Browsing the areas I'm most familiar with in NYC (where we had a building footprint import from city data in 2013), I find that the buildings that are detected by Microsoft but missing from OSM are mostly either already demolished buildings (currently mapped as landuse=construction), small outbuildings, or simply nonexistent. In the cemetery, Microsoft has picked out a few of the more impressive tombs and mausoleums. And in one case Azavea seems to have failed to notice a building that's been mapped in OSM for years (since the import.) Browsing more rural areas in upstate NY, I see thousands of unmapped buildings, mostly houses, that Microsoft successfully detected -- in some cases despite tree cover. The sizes are pretty good and the footprints are okayish. Oddly some of them seem slightly rotated, maybe a trick of the shadows. J ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
