Travel Mapping

User Discussions => Other Discussion => Topic started by: xcvxcvxcv on August 04, 2018, 01:25:58 pm

Title: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: xcvxcvxcv on August 04, 2018, 01:25:58 pm
Maybe I'm missing something, but I recently just created a version of the map for myself and it feels like the non-traveled routes are quite a bit more opaque than I'd like (to the point where sometimes it's a little hard to tell what's traveled and what's not at certain zoom levels). Is there anyway to turn the opacity of the non-traveled routes down to 0?
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: mapcat on August 04, 2018, 05:26:23 pm
On at least one of your maps (http://travelmapping.net/user/region.php?units=miles&u=xcvxcvxcv&rg=IL), it seems pretty clear to me what you have travelled. Have you tried different basemaps to see if one of them offers more contrast? The default (OpenStreetMap) has colored lines drawn under TM's colored lines, which could be causing some issues at some zoom levels.
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: xcvxcvxcv on September 15, 2019, 04:58:20 am
Wow, I can't believe it's been a year since I last looked into this. Anyways, I suppose the original issue I had described was more that when the edges of each road segment intersect/overlap, it creates a darker spot because of the transparency of the edges. If you're zoomed all the way in, it's not an issue, but as you start to zoom out it becomes harder and harder to see certain clinched road segments. In the included screenshots, IL-47 is basically only visible when you're fairly zoomed in. But at most zoom levels, it's hard to even tell IL-47 has any clinched segments unless you already knew what you were looking for and that those segments were already clinched.

https://imgur.com/a/EXGm5mz

I suppose at this rate, I'm just curious what my map would look like if the unclinched road segments were simply not drawn or drawn with an opacity of 0.
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: yakra on September 15, 2019, 12:03:27 pm
I suppose at this rate, I'm just curious what my map would look like if the unclinched road segments were simply not drawn or drawn with an opacity of 0.
User-selectable opacity sounds like a good idea.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/350
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: bejacob on September 15, 2019, 01:00:34 pm
I suppose at this rate, I'm just curious what my map would look like if the unclinched road segments were simply not drawn or drawn with an opacity of 0.
User-selectable opacity sounds like a good idea.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/350

The idea that we can make a selection is important.

I almost always look at maps of places I'm planning to visit so I know which routes I haven't traveled. If I know I can pick up some easy mileage or clinch another route, I'll work that into my driving plans. Often I care more about the unclinched segments.

I can certainly think of times when it would be nice to just look at my clinched routes, so being able to switch back and forth might be a cool enhancement.
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: michih on September 15, 2019, 01:10:03 pm
I almost always look at maps of places I'm planning to visit so I know which routes I haven't traveled. If I know I can pick up some easy mileage or clinch another route, I'll work that into my driving plans. Often I care more about the unclinched segments.

I can certainly think of times when it would be nice to just look at my clinched routes, so being able to switch back and forth might be a cool enhancement.

I think that inverting colors per one-click would be nice. Traveled routes get the color (including opacity) of untraveled rotues and vice versa: https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/38
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: yakra on September 21, 2019, 01:03:30 pm
Another option that might be beneficial for very large maps (think, entire USA): clinched segments only. Advantages include:
* improved data transfer time
* improved rendering time
* smaller memory footprint
I think michih's inverse idea is a good one, so consider this an "in addition to", rather than an "instead of".
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: vdeane on September 22, 2019, 01:50:23 pm
Perhaps there could be a "drawing style" drop-down menu with a few options:
-Full (as it is now)
-Full Inverse (michih's idea, everything but with inverted opacity)
-Clinched Only (clinched segments as now, no unclinched segments)
-Unclinched Only (no clinched segments, unclinched segments more opaque than in Full but not as opaque as clinched segments in Full or Clinched Only)
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: mapcat on September 22, 2019, 07:35:10 pm
Perhaps there could be a "drawing style" drop-down menu with a few options:
-Full (as it is now)
-Full Inverse (michih's idea, everything but with inverted opacity)
-Clinched Only (clinched segments as now, no unclinched segments)
-Unclinched Only (no clinched segments, unclinched segments more opaque than in Full but not as opaque as clinched segments in Full or Clinched Only)
I support this.
Title: Re: Distinguish more between traveled and non-traveled routes
Post by: oscar on September 22, 2019, 08:14:19 pm
Perhaps there could be a "drawing style" drop-down menu with a few options:
-Full (as it is now)
-Full Inverse (michih's idea, everything but with inverted opacity)
-Clinched Only (clinched segments as now, no unclinched segments)
-Unclinched Only (no clinched segments, unclinched segments more opaque than in Full but not as opaque as clinched segments in Full or Clinched Only)
I support this.

Same here. I especially like the fourth option, which would help me find unclinched segments in a sea of clinched routes.