Google Earth, an eye in the sky Options

[Hominid,WA]

I was wondering how many of you guys have seen this application, and if you thought it would be of any great benefit in Bigfoot Research?


http://earth.google.com/

This post has been edited by Hominid,WA: Jul 16 2005, 03:39 AM

[Josh Willard]

I actually wondered this too, but the thing is that it would cost much money to do all of that. I am talking MILLIONS of dollars to size in all of the pixels and to get a satilite especialy for Bigfoot. Yes, It is possible, but we would have to get some serious money!$$$

JVD

[im_justin_sane]

Wow, I just downloaded it...pretty cool. We've all seen satelite imaging before, but this is pretty interactive. I don't think it would be detailed enough for searching for individual people/creatures, though. Especially looking top down. Stick with game cameras.

[micahn]

After playing around with it some I think I like the one from NASA better. It is called World Wind and can be found here
http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
To me it just works better and shows clearer pictures. It does take a better computer to run it, But if you have the PC for it it is a better program I feel.

[Hominid,WA]

Interesting...Well, first let me say I doubt you could use this program to actually "search" for anything that moves. From what I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, but these photos sometimes are years old? I was imagining being able to put Google Earth to use in more of a mapping+search+stratagy approach, so-to-speak. While legacy programs like Terra Server and others mentioned above have been around for a bit, I like google's baby because of it ease of use and it being the most updated, or at least I think it is.

[MountainLady]

Can you search on either one of these programs using longitude/latitude coordinates? Or do you have to have a physical address or specific "known" location? (name of mountain, river, road, etc?)
These are interesting!

This post has been edited by MountainLady: Jul 16 2005, 01:44 PM

[micahn]

Can you search on either one of these programs using longitude/latitude coordinates? Or do you have to have a physical address or specific "known" location? (name of mountain, river, road, etc?)
These are interesting!

Yes you can search them with coordinates. I do find the NASA one easier on this also. On the one shown here they give you a grid to go by, With the NASA one you can type in the coordinates and have it search for them.

This one does say that if you get the pay one (The pro I think it is called) it comes with a GPS added function. Now that might come in real handy but I do not know as I am, not going to pay just to try that.

[MountainLady]

Thanks, Mic!

I'll have to try the NASA one out!

[blair Tucker]

After playing around with it some I think I like the one from NASA better. It is called World Wind and can be found here
http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
To me it just works better and shows clearer pictures. It does take a better computer to run it, But if you have the PC for it it is a better program I feel.

I've tried the NASA's World Wind. Pretty good although the resolution was not as good as Google Earth. Google has some high resolution squares on certain areas that you can see cars and houses clearly while World Wind does not. My computer runs a Pent 4, 2.8, 512 so it should be kicking in the high resolutions if they are there.

[micahn]

After playing around with it some I think I like the one from NASA better. It is called World Wind and can be found here
http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
To me it just works better and shows clearer pictures. It does take a better computer to run it, But if you have the PC for it it is a better program I feel.

I've tried the NASA's World Wind. Pretty good although the resolution was not as good as Google Earth. Google has some high resolution squares on certain areas that you can see cars and houses clearly while World Wind does not. My computer runs a Pent 4, 2.8, 512 so it should be kicking in the high resolutions if they are there.

Humm well I say the other way around for me. I see much better resolution with the NASA one. As far as seeing cars and such I can see them with both. However the NASA one seems to me to be a little clearer pictures.

[belleoftheball]

Wow!

[Huntster]

You folks down south get better photos than we do up here. The satellite is looking straight down at you, but at an angle up here. The picture quality isn't nearly as good up here.

I'd love to try World Wind, but this antique computer can't take it.

[wildernessguy]

I love it!

I've been using it to plot out some of my previous hikes and also investigate new hiking areas. It is a great tool when run in the 3-D mode. Going down inside canyons and looking around, being able to change your point of view is a great feature.

[Paul1968UK]

Excellent photos for my part of the world, appear to be about a year old.

But I want to know who was parked outside my house on the day the photo was taken - it sure wasn't my car


I looked at a few other areas, and the photos are a joke - can't make anything out.

[Paul1968UK]

Here is a good example of what happens when the data runs out..

Attached image(s)

 

[MountainLady]

Is that using the NASA or the Earth program, Paul?

I dunno.. could be a spaceship, Paul... I am seeing s in that.. uhh.. pinkish, weird-lookin blob.
hmm... you do get a lot of crop circles over there after all.
hehehe


I was reading the Worldwind website and it was mentioned it uses a lot of memory. Anyone had a problem with it slowing down their puter?

[Paul1968UK]

That was using the Google Earth program, and that map is not from the UK, so no danger of crop circles



BTW - could you make your signature a little bigger ML? I have an expanded desktop on two monitors, and it isn't quite filling both of them

[MountainLady]

There

Ya happy now? Big ol' baby.



Well.. guess I'll have to try both programs to see which one I prefer...
Kind of like trying on a new sweater.

[Paul1968UK]

There

Ya happy now? Big ol' baby.

I was only kidding - put it back. :doh:

[wildernessguy]

Is that using the NASA or the Earth program, Paul?

I dunno.. could be a spaceship, Paul... I am seeing s in that.. uhh.. pinkish, weird-lookin blob.
hmm... you do get a lot of crop circles over there after all.
hehehe


I was reading the Worldwind website and it was mentioned it uses a lot of memory. Anyone had a problem with it slowing down their puter?

Yes, I downloaded it to my P2 Thinkpad and it stalled out, so I then downloaded it to my P4 and it crawled along. The P4 has two 160 GB hard drives, 512M and hardly anything in memory as background tasks. (It is my CAD / Graphics system).

But the NASA program really slowed it down.

[MountainLady]

Like, no way man! Stop slapping your forehead, Paul.. you have a red mark now.
hee hee!

I had been meaning to take off that bottom part anyway... 'twas but a gentle reminder.

This post has been edited by MountainLady: Jul 20 2005, 09:04 AM

[MountainLady]

Is that using the NASA or the Earth program, Paul?

I dunno.. could be a spaceship, Paul... I am seeing  s in that.. uhh.. pinkish, weird-lookin blob.
hmm...  you do get a lot of crop circles over there after all.
hehehe


I was reading the Worldwind website and it was mentioned it uses a lot of memory. Anyone had a problem with it slowing down their puter?

Yes, I downloaded it to my P2 Thinkpad and it stalled out, so I then downloaded it to my P4 and it crawled along. The P4 has two 160 GB hard drives, 512M and hardly anything in memory as background tasks. (It is my CAD / Graphics system).

But the NASA program really slowed it down.

Thanks Wilderness..

I have around 1024MB of memory, but hate the thought of my puter bogging down.
(sucks when that happens).. I have a need.. for speed! (where the puter is concerned.. oh.. and cars/trucks too)


This post has been edited by MountainLady: Jul 20 2005, 09:02 AM

[ilex]

Here is a good example of what happens when the data runs out..

I've been using Google, too.

The blobby areas are transitions from "aerial photos" to "satellite photos". The more detailed ones are taken by conventional aircraft flying in formation and the images are spliced together with software somehow under contract for Google. Nasa relys solely on Sat imagery. The sat photos have nowhere near the same rez.

That's my understanding anyway.

Wayne

[blair Tucker]

That was what I was thinking. I saw no aerial (airplane photo) resolution in NASA at all. Nothing that you could use to see a car with anyway. We have a GIS system at work that pulls up individual parcels of land with property lines that you could see people standing by their cars. These were taken with planes. I do like NASA's overlays of landmarks better that Google though.

[wildernessguy]

For some great examples of what Google Earth can do, I took my info from my Supai, AZ hike and used Google Earth to get some 3D plots of it. Take a look at them at the link below. Scroll down past the first half of the thumbnail page and you will see the Google images starting with number 1. Click the thumbnail to see the full image. This is some awsome software, and as a code slinger with almost 30 years experience at it, I take my hat off to these software hackers that hacked together this piece of awsome code.



My Supai AZ Photos

[Hominid,WA]

That's pretty cool.

[MountainLady]

I've been playing with Google Earth for over the past hour.. This is too cool!

I was even able to see the home I lived in for over 10 years in (*sniff* home sweet home) Utah!

This rocks and will be helpful! Thanks guys!!

(awesome pics WG!)

This post has been edited by MountainLady: Jul 22 2005, 09:57 AM