Mapping a disc golf course - Zephyr Cove

[pineappaloupe]

I am a GIS geek who also plays disc golf.
I ran into some of the guys who started the Zephyr Cove DGC, started talking, and next thing I know I am volunteering to map the course.

I started off using google earth, but it was annoying because the aerial imagery shifts between years, I was having a hard time putting together a point file, and then having to draw the lines. I wanted to calculate elevation, and the underlying DEM on google earth is really bad for some parts of the course.

I maintain my own student license of ArcMap 10, and know about a LiDAR dataset that it freely available. I got a bit carried away. If you want me to go into detail of what I did just ask. In short: I used raw LiDAR data (19 million points in 500mb) in my sample area. Processed it into a terrain, created a DEM, DSM, and contour lines. Overlaid my GPS points (~3m accuracy, I need 1m but no one has volunteer a Trimble yet), drew the lines, and extracted elevation data from the DEM.

I know I need to make it printer friendly, and need some direction of what information to include, and I am not artistic at all so it needs some love.
Here is my first map, from about a week ago

and one I did today, this time using UTMs so I could get the distances easier (the right way)

if anyone wants to see a pdf:
https://sites.google.com/site/dpdeegan/home/Zephyr%20Cove%20DGC%20v3%20BW.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1

I plan on getting all of the data, including the base images, up on Google Earth. I have been having some trouble with producing the kmz all in one shot, but I think I figured out some different settings.
I know the LiDAR is complete overkill, but I always wanted to calculate vegetation heights.

My next steps are: better GPS points (1m), redoing the DEM/DSM so that I fill in null data and smooth it out so I don't get so much clutter in trees. And add pin positions. Once the base map is figured out adding new points/lines is really easy.
And then get hosting figured out for the kmz and pdf, so that I can just post a QR code at the course.

There are 3 other courses in the Tahoe Basin with LiDAR coverage, so if I can get someone to GPS the courses up north, I'll do all of the courses.


Look closely at the area West of the school, you can see goal posts. The DEM is that accurate.

 

[rootofthechord]

I'm the opposite of an art expert, and I only have limited experience with GIS, but:

holy smokes. This is fantastically rich. I am very impressed and excited.

 

[pineappaloupe]

Thanks. If anything I can make an accurate map image that someone can draw over. Or I can refine the vegetation layer. I might be able to greyscale it so that it could be printed, but I like the yellow circles for baskets.
Making something print friendly is difficult, which is why I need some help from someone with knowledge of that side of things.
Once I get the .kmz up on google earth, and working properly so that I can make all my changes in ArcMap, I will link to it here. Maybe have a second version that can be crown sourced? And put something at the course.

For anyone interested in what LiDAR data, you can view it all processed nicely in Google Earth here:
http://www.opentopography.org/index.php/blog/detail/tahoe_lidar_imagery_in_google_earth
The more useful images are the 315/45 slopeshade. The base stuff is cool too because you can see tons of old roads, logging impacts, trails.

PS: I know that the hole 18 data got cut off. I must have accidentally resized that tables when I was removing the QR code and other stuff before I made the image.

I am thinking about making the whole map in meters, to try to convert some people to the metric system. Your discs are already weighted in grams.... might as well go all the way.

Again, if anyone can take accurate GPS data anywhere in Tahoe, and are interested in using the LiDAR base imagery for map making, let me know. I can probably make another one in an afternoon.

 

[teemkey]

Nice GIS work. I guess my suggestion is that it would be very helpful to include walking paths and/or other objects for the player to use for orientation to the next tee (while at ground level ).

 

[pineappaloupe]

Nice GIS work. I guess my suggestion is that it would be very helpful to include walking paths and/or other objects for the player to use for orientation to the next tee (while at ground level ).

That is a great suggestion, especially because a lot of work has been done to build paths that guide people and prevent erosion. It wouldn't apply to every hole, but on hole 10 they are trying to guide people down a better path. Better signage at the tee pad would help more, but it should be included on the map.

Until I get better GPS points I am going to smooth that base image out, either in the DEM/DSM, or get it in photoshop as is and see if that is a better tool. I'll need to use that type of software anyway before it goes to print.

 

[Kenny53691]

Nice GIS work. I guess my suggestion is that it would be very helpful to include walking paths and/or other objects for the player to use for orientation to the next tee (while at ground level ).

I've never though about this before, but I really like the idea.

 

[ohtobediscing]

I really like the height-of-groundcover on the first map.:thmbup:

 

[knettles]

It's a little thing, but I would suggest changing the lines of the flight path from blue to red. The blue blends in too easily with the green foilage. Afterall, that is the most important part of the map.

 

[Royal Hill]

Thanks. If anything I can make an accurate map image that someone can draw over.

This is actually a great concept. I've done this with the wilderness course map below. The course steward sent me a google earth data set with points and then I took it from there. So the layout is true to z axis (birdseye) but I worked up the surrounding theme elements on the 3/4 angle. Stars are pins.

It's a concept piece that really plays well for many users. Simple, fun, and engaging. Good for course related brochures that the public would see. Good poster wall hanger for those who love the course. Or could go on the back of a t shirt. A newcomer may see it, think - oh that looks fun, and with the aid of on course directional signage could handle it well. Its a 4x6 ratio, so it can be printed professionally as a "photo" at a photo center cheaply and with great color for handouts. (also a great cheap and easy way to print and distribute tourney maps for player packs at events with event course layouts)

Players wanting "player details" can have another map drawn up.
Good to have both. (and a blackline only version for cheap prints)

I sometimes think we overcook our maps for common use sometimes trying to please tourney style players and in the process alienate, confuse, or intimidate those wishing to simply play the course.

 

[Kenny53691]

I am in the beginning stages of a potential 9 hole course. The trouble that I'm running into is that it's hard to get a great map. I work for the local Auditor, but our aerial shots from early last year have a bad shadow from trees issue where I can't even hardly tell where the trees are. I've done some ground work, but I'd like to have a map that could help out a little more. Sadly, I going between the auditor's page and bing maps and trying to figure out stuff from there. Any other suggestions on where to check if the map is current and better?

 

[Timber]

That ground cover vegetation height map is impressive!

 

[TempleOfDoom]

Great job. It's about time Zephyr had a map. It seems to me that the elevation drop on hole 10 should be more than the drop on hole 9. Though 10 is one of the few pins that moves out there, so it's possible the position on the map is one that is set up the opposite hill side.

 

[pineappaloupe]

It's a little thing, but I would suggest changing the lines of the flight path from blue to red. The blue blends in too easily with the green foilage. Afterall, that is the most important part of the map.

Good input. I honestly chose blue because one of the highlights of this course are the views of the giant impossibly blue Lake Tahoe from Hole 9 and 15.
I can change that easily and save all of my old color choices.

Great job. It's about time Zephyr had a map. It seems to me that the elevation drop on hole 10 should be more than the drop on hole 9. Though 10 is one of the few pins that moves out there, so it's possible the position on the map is one that is set up the opposite hill side.

There are a few explanations for this. If the GPS points were off by 3m along the length of the hole that would have a big change in the elevation. I suspect it is because the basket is both under larger trees, and in the corner of that steep ravine. The ground probably obscures 1/3 of the sky. I made a note when i collected that point that the accuracy was bad. And it probably always will be until I get my hands on a better GPS unit.
The elevation calculated in Google Earth was even worse because their base DEM is way off, it shows that the basket is above the tee.....

 

[pineappaloupe]

I am in the beginning stages of a potential 9 hole course. The trouble that I'm running into is that it's hard to get a great map. I work for the local Auditor, but our aerial shots from early last year have a bad shadow from trees issue where I can't even hardly tell where the trees are. I've done some ground work, but I'd like to have a map that could help out a little more. Sadly, I going between the auditor's page and bing maps and trying to figure out stuff from there. Any other suggestions on where to check if the map is current and better?

I was able to use some 6" resolution imagery last week and the shadows were really bad too in some places. And the imagery also has a perspective. Unlike the LiDAR data which is compiled to always be looking directly down on every pixel (projected coordinates, UTMs).

I would think the imagery from the auditor is georeferenced better than Bing or Google. I know that the LiDAR I have is as good as it gets because I worked on the project that ground truthed it, and we were measuring our center points to 10cm and the trees in the plots to 1cm. And if you look at that LiDAR on Google earth and choose the 2010 aerial imagery, it matches the LiDAR. The more recent imagery does not. In the case of GE, the difference is 3m or so.

Go find a manhole cover that is visible im both images and go get the best GPS point possible. See how that point is relative to both sources.
Honestly it is impossible to know unless you know something about who collected the data or people who work with the data. I got lucky because I know the people who worked with the 2010 stuff are super nerds. They didn't send us to the middle of nowhere with a full station for nothing.

 

[sansho]

Wow this is some impressive stuff! So glad Zephyr is getting a map. First time I played it, I had no guide, and navigation was a bit of an issue.

 

[pineappaloupe]

Here is the new map. The only feedback I got that I could implement now was on the color of the hole lines. Red is much better.
I changed the labeling, removed the word hole and just used the number in a circle. Little stuff like that can take a surprising amount of time. Picking a font that is not generic, making sure it fits in the background. And then how to place the labels on the line. Once I decide on the font and label style (circle), I can move them around to be somewhere other than on the line.
Most of the work was spent on refining the base image. There is a lot going on to produce that DEM because of how the ground hits are classified. The buildings are not classified as ground in this dataset. And really thick trees somehow lead to gaps. So I had a bunch of 'no data' points the DEM and the DSM. So when you subtract the two, you get even more 'No Data'
I want trees that are as close to solid green as possible, those little gaps make some of them look like donuts. Get it to look somewhat stylized and not so much of a raster. I might try to see if I can get the cell size under 2m. Most cell sizes for this type of data are 5m.
I also reoriented the map so that the course is vertical. This is in preparation for the final product which will be rack cards.

So here is version 4.0.

link to PDF:
https://sites.google.com/site/dpdeegan/home/maps/Zephyr%20Cove%20DGC%20v4%20color.pdf

I might try to get the KMZ up tonight. Google isn't playing nice with elevation of the points and lines. Their DEM is problem.

 

[pineappaloupe]

I was able to create 1m cell size ground cover imagery. It is taking me longer to figure out how to properly symbolize the data than it is to create it. I am pretty sure that I can meaningfully classify this stuff starting at 25cm of vegetation height. So i have 0-.25m, .25-.5m, 1-2m, 2-3m, 3-5m, 5-10, 10-20, and everything 20-52m is all just dark green.

Anyway.
Once I nail down my colors for the base images, and decide on some other graphical elements, it is going to take longer to collect GPS points than make a map.
All I need is 1m post-processed points.... spread the word.

 

[Kenny53691]

I was able to use some 6" resolution imagery last week and the shadows were really bad too in some places. And the imagery also has a perspective. Unlike the LiDAR data which is compiled to always be looking directly down on every pixel (projected coordinates, UTMs).

I would think the imagery from the auditor is georeferenced better than Bing or Google. I know that the LiDAR I have is as good as it gets because I worked on the project that ground truthed it, and we were measuring our center points to 10cm and the trees in the plots to 1cm. And if you look at that LiDAR on Google earth and choose the 2010 aerial imagery, it matches the LiDAR. The more recent imagery does not. In the case of GE, the difference is 3m or so.

Go find a manhole cover that is visible im both images and go get the best GPS point possible. See how that point is relative to both sources.
Honestly it is impossible to know unless you know something about who collected the data or people who work with the data. I got lucky because I know the people who worked with the 2010 stuff are super nerds. They didn't send us to the middle of nowhere with a full station for nothing.

I'll look into doing that, but I'm more concerned on finding a decent aerial map than I am the exact location. I guess I'll just have to spend a lot more time on the ground down there.

 

[pineappaloupe]

I'll look into doing that, but I'm more concerned on finding a decent aerial map than I am the exact location. I guess I'll just have to spend a lot more time on the ground down there.

I like Google Earth because you can see multiple years of imagery and add your own stuff.
Imagery is expensive. Depending on where you live, who paid for it, if it is public record, etc, it might be hard or easy. And when there is the situation where you can get the image but it isn't georeferenced.
See if there is a GIS data clearinghosue in your city/county/region. Lots of universities host that kind of information.

 

[pineappaloupe]

OK. I have my imagery all set up. Now I need accurate points. I have my point file set up so that that if given accurate Lat/Long (in NAD 83) I can edit my vertecies. No need to create a new file, I can keep all of my attributes for labeling and getting it to display in Google Earth properly.

If you want to see the points/lines, I have it all in a kmz and am going to open it up to the community.

If you are very interested in editing send me a PM or email.

Notes:
Points are accurate to 10-30ft (see why I need a real GPS unit).
The elevation in GE, is way off. Refer to my contours for real idea of the terrain.
If you can see a feature (basket or tee) on imagery, mark it and label it.
For best results, make sure your view is directly above the area.
All of the points and lines do have attributes, everything you need to identify it.
Don't change my points, just send me what it is, and the new coordinates, in decimal degrees.
Everything that has been verified has a field that is filled in with something like 'Yes. dpd 6-24'. Non verified points have nothing.
Check the description for information.
Let me know if there are any problems with the .kmz.

here it is!
https://sites.google.com/site/dpdeegan/home/maps/ZC%20DGC%20featuers%20for%20editing.kmz