Mapping Out Woods for Tee Signs

[ryanhutchings96]

What is the best way to map out the location of tees, baskets, trees, and other obstacles when in the woods? I am able to use Google Earth for the holes out in the open, but those in the woods are near impossible with that technique.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Here's the trick. Once you've brought up your property map on Google Earth, find the button in the middle of the top rail that shows historical aerial images. Click the slider going back in time to see images from different times of the year. Select either an early spring or late fall image where you can usually see much of the ground with the leaves down. The winter snow images may not work as well if the snow is covering up trails and other reference marks that might help you locate your positions.

 

[ryanhutchings96]

Here's the trick. Once you've brought up your property map on Google Earth, find the button in the middle of the top rail that shows historical aerial images. Click the slider going back in time to see images from different times of the year. Select either an early spring or late fall image where you can usually see much of the ground with the leaves down. The winter snow images may not work as well if the snow is covering up trails and other reference marks that might help you locate your positions.

I do have a winter image from a few years ago, but the shadows of the trees make it really trick to make out anything. It is hard to pinpoint certain trees that I want to be reflected accurately in the map as they play a large part in the layout (e.g. guardian trees).

 

[Steve West]

It's not all that much trouble to run around with a GPS and get coordinates for every trunk in the fairway, and walk up and down the edges of the fairway to make a track. Plot the coordinates and draw the trees.

Or, you can map a simple map of your mental image of the hole. The goal of the tee sign is not to be an accurate survey, but to help the player know how to throw. If the guardian trees are all the player needs to think about, just put those where you would be able to plan how to attack them. Sometimes, a caricature of the hole map can get the point across better than an accurate depiction. Just like a caricature of a face is recognized faster than an accurate drawing.

 

[ryanhutchings96]

It's not all that much trouble to run around with a GPS and get coordinates for every trunk in the fairway, and walk up and down the edges of the fairway to make a track. Plot the coordinates and draw the trees.

Or, you can map a simple map of your mental image of the hole. The goal of the tee sign is not to be an accurate survey, but to help the player know how to throw. If the guardian trees are all the player needs to think about, just put those where you would be able to plan how to attack them. Sometimes, a caricature of the hole map can get the point across better than an accurate depiction. Just like a caricature of a face is recognized faster than an accurate drawing.

Fair point. Are there GPS devices available that are more accurate that phones? My phone only ever seems to say it is accurate to 16', which is a lot in disc golf.

 

[biscoe]

Or, you can map a simple map of your mental image of the hole. The goal of the tee sign is not to be an accurate survey, but to help the player know how to throw. If the guardian trees are all the player needs to think about, just put those where you would be able to plan how to attack them. Sometimes, a caricature of the hole map can get the point across better than an accurate depiction. Just like a caricature of a face is recognized faster than an accurate drawing.

This. Tee signs with too much detail/information drive me nuts. I don't want to look at the thing for 5 minutes. I just want to know which direction to go.

 

[ThrowBot]

The guy who made Caliber went and surveyed every relevant tree. The tee signs are hand made but perfectly to scale. There are also signs scattered throughout each fairway that tell you distance to the pin and/or distance from the tee.

So if you want to do it PROPERLY, get that dude to help you.

 

[Steve West]

Fair point. Are there GPS devices available that are more accurate that phones? My phone only ever seems to say it is accurate to 16', which is a lot in disc golf.

Yes, there are more accurate devices.

However, that 16 foot error tends to change slowly in size and direction, so if you go from tee to tree to tree to target quickly, their positions relative to each other will be fairly accurate.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

What is the best way to map out the location of tees, baskets, trees, and other obstacles when in the woods? I am able to use Google Earth for the holes out in the open, but those in the woods are near impossible with that technique.

There are several gps programs for hikers that will show the path you walk even through the woods. You can mark waypoints (trees/obstackes) tracks and routes. This can then be imported into Google Earth by first exporting a .kml file from the app and opening in Google Earth. This will give you good enough waypoints to map the layout on Google Earth.

I will occasionally create signs by simply exporting the Google Earth Imagery and using that as a base image to draw out the hole. It lets you get as close to scale as you would probably want. But as others have said, you only need to give the player a basic idea of the layout of the hole and show which way to throw.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

Another tool that I learned about after I used a surveyor/engineer as a consultant is an App for iPhones called Theodolite. The name is from a surveying tool. In any event, it allows you to take photographs that show GPS location and angles, including Altitude, Azimuth and Compass direction of the camera. You can just take photos at the basket and tees and it will put the info directly into the image. The App isn't available for Android yet, but there is a similar Android app called Dioptra.

Most digital cameras these days have gps chips and will append that information to the photo's metadata.

Photos with GPS data appended to them can then be converted to a .kml/.kmz file and be imported into Google Earth Pro as waypoints that show the photo and allow you to click the photo icon and display the image in Google Earth Pro.

If you want accurate distances plus elevation changes, Nikon makes a forestry rangefinder that will give you both elevation and distance.

 

[jupiterboy]

GPS obv. has a place, but you can get a really long tape for not much. This can give a better representation of distance, in a way, because it's not "as the crow flies" distance. You can account for turns, trees, etc.

You can also work to a scale, just start with your longest hole and fit that to the sign size/shape, then reduce down using that longest hole as the scale. Your shortest hole will look small on the sign, but it will add some accuracy.

With trees, those will change over time, so consider the life of the sign and how often you want to redo/update.

 

[Cashley56]

Idk about gps in a heavily wooded course. Dense trees throw it off. In my experience, often by 30' or more.

 

[Cashley56]

Here's the trick. Once you've brought up your property map on Google Earth, find the button in the middle of the top rail that shows historical aerial images. Click the slider going back in time to see images from different times of the year. Select either an early spring or late fall image where you can usually see much of the ground with the leaves down. The winter snow images may not work as well if the snow is covering up trails and other reference marks that might help you locate your positions.

I've had no success with Google Earth (including Google Earth Pro) with our densely wooded course. All you see is the tops of trees in summer views and a much of trunks and shadows in winter views. Can't see the shape of the holes at all. I have no doubt it works fine, however, on a course with mostly open holes.

 

[glassila]

GPS obv. has a place, but you can get a really long tape for not much. This can give a better representation of distance, in a way, because it's not "as the crow flies" distance. You can account for turns, trees, etc.

You can also work to a scale, just start with your longest hole and fit that to the sign size/shape, then reduce down using that longest hole as the scale. Your shortest hole will look small on the sign, but it will add some accuracy.

With trees, those will change over time, so consider the life of the sign and how often you want to redo/update.

I would not consider this.
The images used on your tee signs should all be the same size whether it's a satellite photo, drawn image or whatever. The image for a 200 foot hole should not be smaller than the image for a 500 foot hole. When a player sees the distance for a hole they will figure out how that distance corresponds to the image.

 

[jupiterboy]

I would not consider this.
The images used on your tee signs should all be the same size whether it's a satellite photo, drawn image or whatever. The image for a 200 foot hole should not be smaller than the image for a 500 foot hole. When a player sees the distance for a hole they will figure out how that distance corresponds to the image.

Can you develop this idea a bit more? I'm not seeing the advantages of a random scale. I can see considerable advantages to having an accurate scale. You could potentially maximize the size of a shorter hole, assuming it wasn't a dogleg etc. where the width would likely limit size. That's about as far as I get.

 

[Steve West]

Can you develop this idea a bit more? I'm not seeing the advantages of a random scale. I can see considerable advantages to having an accurate scale. You could potentially maximize the size of a shorter hole, assuming it wasn't a dogleg etc. where the width would likely limit size. That's about as far as I get.

There's never enough room for the maps you'd like to have. So making each map as big as possible makes sense. If you pull all the tee sign maps off of an overall course map and blow them up to fill each sign, the tee pads and targets will look bigger on the shorter holes. That will be a visceral clue about the scale.

 

[jupiterboy]

I hear you, but keeping trees and baskets in the same scale is standard practice. It's just that you most often see a random scale for the whole length with the same sized baskets and trees, walkways, etc.

What I've done, and what I am proposing is that keeping the holes in the same scale as the master map is actually more information—less misinformation, translation, confusion.

I've seen it work well, and would look at it from an information design perspective. Worth consideration, IMO.

 

[glassila]

Can you develop this idea a bit more? I'm not seeing the advantages of a random scale. I can see considerable advantages to having an accurate scale. You could potentially maximize the size of a shorter hole, assuming it wasn't a dogleg etc. where the width would likely limit size. That's about as far as I get.

Hole #3 is roughly twice as long as hole #6, but the images are basically the same size.

 

[jupiterboy]

Yes. I would bet this is a common if not the most common approach. It's what I see most often.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

This. Tee signs with too much detail/information drive me nuts. I don't want to look at the thing for 5 minutes. I just want to know which direction to go.

^ Worth restating.

All I really want out of a tee sign is to tell me:
1) Hole #.
2) Distance to basket
3) Where the basket is.
4) Any water in play or OB.

I don't need to know where the trees are.
My discs will find them just fine.