For examples of places where OSM seems to have higher quality than relief see sloped lakes in Tatra mountains at http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/49.2044/20.0272&layers=C
On 7 Nov 2017 8:48 a.m., "Martin Koppenhoefer" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 7. Nov 2017, at 03:22, Daniel Koć <daniel@koć.pl> wrote: > > > > 3. What do you think about using OSM hillshading "fork" which could be > editable somehow to follow OSM data (of course it doesn't belong to OSM > database, since it's a raster data, not a vector one)? > > > I’ve generally found very good correspondence between srtm and osm, in > hilly areas the hillshading made the map much more readable, and especially > the parts without trees growing on them made much more sense (as you could > see that they were on the hilltops and oriented to the same direction). > > I can’t imagine editing height raster data based on osm though, how would > you do it? This implies moving bits quite a lot probably, because you won’t > even notice 5 or 10 meters in 30 or 90m grid data. I would expect global > coverage 3D scan data to be more reliable than osm and would rather do the > opposite (adjust osm to fit hillshading). > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
