Electronic Charting
 

Has anybody compared The CAPN by Nautical Technologies and Nobeltec's VNS
version 8 or 9? Any recommendations? Has anybody tested both Electronic
Charting systems?

Electronic Charting
 

Practical Sailor did a review of electronic charting programs in Sep
2006 issue. First of all, a comparison between Cap'n, and Nobeltec is
somewhat moot since Cap'n, was bought out by Maptch and is no longer
marketed. However, neither program was highly rated. Cap'n, one of
the first programs on the market, is somewhat dated, even in the latest
version. Nobeltec VNS is slow to adapt to new devices and only accepts
proprietary vector charts (but does accept most formats of raster
charts). Nobeltec does not support 3D viewing. Cap'n does not support
weather GRIB. Cap',--poor useability, poor stability, good tech
support (Maptech will continue to support the product). Nobeltec good
usability, excellent stability and excellent tech support. Also, the
review noted that Nobeltec seemed geared to the powerboat crowd. All
this said, I have an older version of Cap'n and it seems pretty good to
me, but then, I have little to compare it to. Practical Sailor
Recommended GPS NAVX/MACENC and Maxsea. They said that Fugawi Marine
was a best buy and Chart Navigator Pro/Coastal Explorer was the best
choice (this is a Maptech program). I also have a lite version of
Maptech's program--it seems pretty good, but it won't support my older
model eTrex handheld (Cap'n does).
Don Bouchard wrote:
Has anybody compared The CAPN by Nautical Technologies and Nobeltec's VNS
version 8 or 9? Any recommendations? Has anybody tested both Electronic
Charting systems?

Electronic Charting
 

Thanks for the informative review of choices.

Don

***
"Peter" wrote in message
oups.com...
Practical Sailor did a review of electronic charting programs in Sep
2006 issue. First of all, a comparison between Cap'n, and Nobeltec is
somewhat moot since Cap'n, was bought out by Maptch and is no longer
marketed. However, neither program was highly rated. Cap'n, one of
the first programs on the market, is somewhat dated, even in the latest
version. Nobeltec VNS is slow to adapt to new devices and only accepts
proprietary vector charts (but does accept most formats of raster
charts). Nobeltec does not support 3D viewing. Cap'n does not support
weather GRIB. Cap',--poor useability, poor stability, good tech
support (Maptech will continue to support the product). Nobeltec good
usability, excellent stability and excellent tech support. Also, the
review noted that Nobeltec seemed geared to the powerboat crowd. All
this said, I have an older version of Cap'n and it seems pretty good to
me, but then, I have little to compare it to. Practical Sailor
Recommended GPS NAVX/MACENC and Maxsea. They said that Fugawi Marine
was a best buy and Chart Navigator Pro/Coastal Explorer was the best
choice (this is a Maptech program). I also have a lite version of
Maptech's program--it seems pretty good, but it won't support my older
model eTrex handheld (Cap'n does).
Don Bouchard wrote:
Has anybody compared The CAPN by Nautical Technologies and Nobeltec's VNS
version 8 or 9? Any recommendations? Has anybody tested both Electronic
Charting systems?

Electronic Charting
 

Don Bouchard wrote:
Has anybody compared The CAPN by Nautical Technologies and Nobeltec's VNS
version 8 or 9? Any recommendations? Has anybody tested both Electronic
Charting systems?


Personnaly i prefer Nobeltec, i got Admiral v7, can take Raster, Vector
and 3D charts. I tried Maptech and Fugawi, not better than Nobeltec.

Yes Nobeltec is slower, but at the speed i'm cruising, it's ok

Andre

Electronic Charting
 

"I also have a lite version of Maptech's program--it seems pretty good,
but it won't support my older model eTrex handheld (Cap'n does)."

Huh? Surely it must be able to interface to the etrex when the etrex is
in NMEA mode as opposed to Garmin mode.

I have hooked up my eTrex to just about everything that takes a GPS
input without any problems.

Thanks for the info on the reviews.

Tom

Electronic Charting
 

Chart Navigator Pro/Coastal Explorer was the best
choice (this is a Maptech program).

Technically, Chart Navigator Pro is a relabelled copy of Coastal Explorer
(made by Rosepoint) but bundled with quite a few of (all?) Maptech's US
chart DVDs. That said, it's a GREAT program regardless of which version.

Electronic Charting
 

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 02:25:30 +0000, Don Bouchard wrote:

Has anybody compared The CAPN by Nautical Technologies and Nobeltec's
VNS version 8 or 9? Any recommendations? Has anybody tested both
Electronic Charting systems?

My favorite is Pocket Navigator running on a PDA, but I reach for The
Cap'n when I need a backup. We have others aboard too --
all versions of Maptech back to 1.0 for DOS, plus a couple of older
versions of Nobletec (6?). They all have their problems, either bugs or
poor usability, or being cluttered with useless crud while
important things go missing. The Cap'n is at least simple and uncluttered,
but plotting courses is a pain because the screen/cursor movement is
cumbersome.

Pocket Navigator, nee Memory Map Navigator (stupid name), works like a
charm. The only problem is that it takes both a PC and a PDA.

I'm convinced this stuff is not designed by boaters anymo we're
a side business now compared to the land-based products.

All this stuff should be better than it is. With all the
engineer/tinkerer/technical types in the yachting world, I'm amazed we
don't have better software.

I haven't tried Fugawi, but I'd like to. I'm convinced vector charts are
the way to go.

Matt O.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
g...

I haven't tried Fugawi, but I'd like to. I'm convinced vector charts are
the way to go.

Matt O

And I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that, perhaps, I
am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of 'old-fart'. I
am in the process of looking at some current generation chart plotters to go
on a new boat. I haven't paid much attention to marine electronics in the
past 6 or 7 years since I outfitted my last boat. It has surprised my that
every non-pc based chart plotter out there is vector based --- no one has
done one to support raster.

I have been using paper charts for nearly 55 years. My last 2 boats had PC
based systems (Maptech and/or Cap'n). I found that having chart images on
my screen that looked exactly like the charts on my nav table was a BIG
plus.

It has been my experience that vector charts have less information on them
than raster charts. While some see this as an advantage I do not: one mans
clutter is another mans important data. Most of the vector charts that I
have looked at do not show light characteristics: you need to point to it
to get a pop up. That makes absolutely no sense to me. Having to manage my
vessel and putz around with a pointing device trying to find the light with
a 6 second flash is somewhere between dumb and dangerous. Raster charts
have all the information right there with no screwing around. Vector
technology salesmen take great pride in their products' ability to remove
layers of information to 'unclutter' the screen. When they demo this
feature, all I see being removed is information I deem important. My
understanding of the vector chart manufacturing process is that they all
start out with the raster charts. So they do not have any more accurate or
timely information. In fact the process of going from one format to the
other has been known to introduce errors.

Let me say at this point that I am a retired geek. I have spent most of my
life playing around with the then current technologies. I still consider my
self to be pretty much of a geek. So I am not afraid of something new. I
had great hope for vector charting. but IMHO, that promise has yet to be
fulfilled. The biggest failure of this technology is in not being able to
provide timely updates. With digital, it should be a simple matter to push
out weekly (daily ??) NTM updates via the internet. This is something I had
been able to do with the MapTech Pro service . Each week I would get NTM
updates to 100% of my charts. Now, you can download them yourself for free.
Not with vector charts.

So, less information, less accurate information, less usable information,
what am I missing? Am I really getting that far out of touch?

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:00 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that, perhaps, I
am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of 'old-fart'.

I hear you, vector charts definitely takes some getting used to, and
for some things raster is clearly superior.

For the last two years I've had both side by side, raster on
PC/Maptech, and CMAP/vector on a Furuno chart plotter. I agree with
much of what you say, but have come to appreciate some of the benefits
of vector as well.

One thing that vector does much better is "zoom in" and "zoom out".
When you zoom a raster chart the text fonts and pixel details get
larger and smaller also, which renders them illegible very quickly.
Vector on the other hand automatically compensates for zoom level so
that font sizes are constant, and detail pixels are adjusted to an
appropriate size. The net result is that fewer vector charts are
required for any given area since detail improves as you zoom in,
unlike raster which requires an entirely new chart to show greater
detail.

The other area where vector is clearly superior, is "course up" mode.
Course-up is a much more intuitve way to view chart data, particularly
in close quarters. However, if you display raster charts "course up"
on anything other than a north bound heading, chart text and symbols
appear rotated out of the normal vertical orientation, and are
actually upside down in south bound directions. With raster charts,
the text and symbols are automatically rotated to stay in normal
orientation, making course-up much more useful.

On our boat I generally do all of my route planning on the PC using
raster charts since Maptech is very good at that, and I can do
everything off-line in the comfort of the main cabin the night before.
While running I keep the PC zoomed out to show the big picture and the
route information such as range/bearing to next waypoint, total miles,
time-to-go, etc. On longer legs I will transfer the next waypoint
details to the Furuno chart plotter as well. The chart plotter is
usually left in course-up mode and zoomed in to a fairly high level of
detail where chart symbols are resonably uncluttered and easily
readable.

Another superior feature of the chart plotter, unrelated to
vector/raster, is screen brightness and clarity. The brightness level
is fully adjustable for comfortable viewing all the way from direct
sunlight to complete darkness. No PC or flat panel display that I
have used has a comparable level of brightness or adjustability.

With the right selection of features and options, the chart plotter
has some other worthwhile attributes. For example our Furuno system
has the ability to super impose radar data on top of the chart display
which is very useful for identifying unkown radar blips and determinig
whether or not it is a navaid or probable boat. Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Hmmm, no it doesn't. At least not on a Raymarine E-80. I can overlay radar
on top of charts in any orientation. I tend to prefer North up orientation,
but the admiral likes it to rotate with the heading. It's a snap to change
between them.

When dealing with charts at the helm I find vector more useful. When
plotting courses on a laptop, however, raster seems better. For me the
difference is what I need to know RIGHT NOW versus planning what I where I
feel like going at some later time. The vector charts with the ability to
zoom in/out quickly and without losing detail (getting grainy like raster)
are of tremendous help when actually moving. Granted, I'm usually at 30kts
in a powerboat; those in sailboats might have a different sense of urgency.
But when I'm planning trips ahead of time I find the extra detail they've
got on raster charts to be rather handy. I generally use Coastal Explorer
(aka Maptech Chart Navigator Pro) with Maptech digital charts. On the
chartplotter I use a Navionics platinum chip.

If faced with having to choose one over the other I'd probably go with
vector because of it's benefits (for me anyway) while underway and just use
other sources for trip planning extras.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:56:53 -0400, "Bill Kearney"
wrote:

Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Hmmm, no it doesn't. At least not on a Raymarine E-80. I can overlay radar
on top of charts in any orientation. I tend to prefer North up orientation,
but the admiral likes it to rotate with the heading. It's a snap to change
between them.

I agree that it is theoretically possible to rotate the radar image
instead of the chart image. In practice however, virtually everyone
is used to looking at radar images in "heading up" format.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:00 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that, perhaps, I
am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of 'old-fart'.

I hear you, vector charts definitely takes some getting used to, and
for some things raster is clearly superior.

For the last two years I've had both side by side, raster on
PC/Maptech, and CMAP/vector on a Furuno chart plotter. I agree with
much of what you say, but have come to appreciate some of the benefits
of vector as well.

I have never actually used vector charts underway. Marine vector only in
showrooms and boatshows. Like it or not, I suspect I am going to have to
make the leap -- grumbeling all the way, but doing it. I am in the process
of downsizing and won't have the room or 'trons to do what I am used to.

One thing that vector does much better is "zoom in" and "zoom out".
When you zoom a raster chart the text fonts and pixel details get
larger and smaller also, which renders them illegible very quickly.

Again, something I will have to 'learn to love'.

Vector on the other hand automatically compensates for zoom level so
that font sizes are constant, and detail pixels are adjusted to an
appropriate size. The net result is that fewer vector charts are
required for any given area since detail improves as you zoom in,
unlike raster which requires an entirely new chart to show greater
detail.

Logically that should be the case. The examples that I have seem in demo
machines don't have much of the detail I am used to seeing to begin with, so
the zooming effect doesn't matter --- the details ain't there. It may well
turn out that that is more a function of the demo, demo operator or
excessive nit picking on my part. In the long run, if it isn't totally true
now, it will be someday.


The other area where vector is clearly superior, is "course up" mode.
Course-up is a much more intuitve way to view chart data, particularly
in close quarters. However, if you display raster charts "course up"
on anything other than a north bound heading, chart text and symbols
appear rotated out of the normal vertical orientation, and are
actually upside down in south bound directions. With raster charts,
the text and symbols are automatically rotated to stay in normal
orientation, making course-up much more useful.

This is one of those interesting areas that make vector a selling point for
some, but not me. Having done paper charts (read north up) for so long, it
is natural for me. I have tied using my Maptech in course up and found it
disorienting. My minds eye sees the world in a north-up orientation,
looking at something in a heading up orientation feels, well, just wrong.
No, I didn't give it a real chance. I tried it for half an hour ro so here
and there, pronounce the foolishness of it all, and go back to north up.
There are some paper charts strips in the Chartbooks that are turned to
other than north up to optimize printing, I turn the North up too (chart
book cockeyed). Ok, I have found the problem: I AM and old fart!!!!!!


On our boat I generally do all of my route planning on the PC using
raster charts since Maptech is very good at that, and I can do
everything off-line in the comfort of the main cabin the night before.
While running I keep the PC zoomed out to show the big picture and the
route information such as range/bearing to next waypoint, total miles,
time-to-go, etc. On longer legs I will transfer the next waypoint
details to the Furuno chart plotter as well. The chart plotter is
usually left in course-up mode and zoomed in to a fairly high level of
detail where chart symbols are resonably uncluttered and easily
readable.

I had a similar drill. After I loaded (or selected) my route in Maptech, I
would export the Waypoints into my GPS system. If the computer crapped out,
everything was ready to go on the GPS. This was especially useful when
offshore. I had the autopilot set up to take steering commands from either
the computer or the GPS. Again, if the computer died, I would not actually
have to steer the boat - heaven forbid!


Another superior feature of the chart plotter, unrelated to
vector/raster, is screen brightness and clarity. The brightness level
is fully adjustable for comfortable viewing all the way from direct
sunlight to complete darkness. No PC or flat panel display that I
have used has a comparable level of brightness or adjustability.

I had high brightness OceanPc displays in a pilot house environment, so this
was not a problem. It will be an issue in the new boat: no pilot house.


With the right selection of features and options, the chart plotter
has some other worthwhile attributes. For example our Furuno system
has the ability to super impose radar data on top of the chart display
which is very useful for identifying unkown radar blips and determinig
whether or not it is a navaid or probable boat. Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

While all of this has been available in the PC / Raster chart arena,
certainly not a cost that compares well with the integrated solutions
available with vector charts. This is a great feature and I look forward to
playing with it. I suspect this really requires the use of a gyro compass
to get a sufficiently stabilized overlay. I had a gyro on my last boat and
it made a big difference in ARPA accuracy.

I hope I have that whine out of my system so I can just get on with it...

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

I agree that it is theoretically possible to rotate the radar image
instead of the chart image. In practice however, virtually everyone
is used to looking at radar images in "heading up" format.

There's no theory involved, the E-80 does it. At least from the perspective
that someone that wants to see the radar overlaid on charts can do so while
the charts are being displayed in a 'heading up' orientation. Or if
they're looking at the chart in 'north up' orientation it'll likewise
overlay the radar. We use these two modes all the time.

Uh well, yeah, when looking at *only* the radar scope rings it's rather
standard to see them in heading up format. I think you can show it in north
up mode as well. Although I personally don't see myself ever using it that
way.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

Logically that should be the case. The examples that I have seem in demo
machines don't have much of the detail I am used to seeing to begin with,
so the zooming effect doesn't matter --- the details ain't there.

Get a demo with one of the better charting chips actually loaded. The
default chart data is pretty weak in most chartplotters. Mainly because
there's limited memory in them and with worldwide marketability it'd be
rather impractical to install any (as in, nothing's 'local' when you're
talking worldwide).

For me the speed with which I can zoom in/out while ALSO getting better
clarity makes vector charts superior. But this only when underway. I like
using raster charts for planning but they're too slow to pan around and
don't have close enough detail for the places I usually frequent.

This is one of those interesting areas that make vector a selling point
for some, but not me. Having done paper charts (read north up) for so
long, it is natural for me. I have tied using my Maptech in course up and
found it disorienting

Fortunately North-up orientation is selectable regardless of chart style.

I had high brightness OceanPc displays in a pilot house environment, so
this was not a problem. It will be an issue in the new boat: no pilot
house.

Then going with an actual marine chartplotter will probably be better. If
not just for the display brightness but also for the purpose-intended
waterproof keys. No fiddling around with remembering what Function keys are
supposed to be doing...

While all of this has been available in the PC / Raster chart arena,
certainly not a cost that compares well with the integrated solutions
available with vector charts. This is a great feature and I look forward
to playing with it. I suspect this really requires the use of a gyro
compass to get a sufficiently stabilized overlay. I had a gyro on my last
boat and it made a big difference in ARPA accuracy.

Hmmm, dunno. I don't have my autopilot running most of the time (powered
off) and the MARPA features work great. And, iirc, there's not a gyro in
this one anyway. But then again I'm in a powerboat so gyro sensing is
probably less important.

I hope I have that whine out of my system so I can just get on with it...

Heh.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:49:01 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I suspect this really requires the use of a gyro compass
to get a sufficiently stabilized overlay. I had a gyro on my last boat and
it made a big difference in ARPA accuracy.

Not really. I have an electronic compass sensor and it works just
fine for both ARPA and chart/radar overlay.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:49:01 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I suspect this really requires the use of a gyro compass
to get a sufficiently stabilized overlay. I had a gyro on my last boat
and
it made a big difference in ARPA accuracy.

Not really. I have an electronic compass sensor and it works just
fine for both ARPA and chart/radar overlay.

Interesting. Actually, the Gyro was part of the KVH TracVision system.
Extra output port allowed it to interface with the radar. The Fluxgate I
had did not respond fast enough to keep up with rock'n and roll'n in any
kind of seas, the Gyro did much better. New boat will not have KVH so maybe
the electronic comass will do the job. Thanks for the input

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:56:53 -0400, "Bill Kearney"
wrote:


Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Hmmm, no it doesn't. At least not on a Raymarine E-80. I can overlay radar
on top of charts in any orientation. I tend to prefer North up orientation,
but the admiral likes it to rotate with the heading. It's a snap to change
between them.


I agree that it is theoretically possible to rotate the radar image
instead of the chart image. In practice however, virtually everyone
is used to looking at radar images in "heading up" format.

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction. It comes from the days of using parallel index
lines when navigating blind.

Gary

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:15:38 GMT, Gary wrote:

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction.

Are you talking about radar or charting ?

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:15:38 GMT, Gary wrote:


I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction.


Are you talking about radar or charting ?

Both.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 03:31:52 GMT, Gary wrote:

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction.


Are you talking about radar or charting ?

Both.

The vast majority of small boat radars display only in "heading up"
mode.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 03:31:52 GMT, Gary wrote:

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction.

Are you talking about radar or charting ?

Both.

The vast majority of small boat radars display only in "heading up"
mode.
I don't know about the "vast majority" but my entry level Raymarine
SL70 installed in 1999 has North-Up, so I assume all Ray's sold in
this century have it.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 03:31:52 GMT, Gary wrote:

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course
or make a small correction.

Are you talking about radar or charting ?
Both.

The vast majority of small boat radars display only in "heading up"
mode.
I don't know about the "vast majority" but my entry level Raymarine SL70
installed in 1999 has North-Up, so I assume all Ray's sold in this century
have it.

FWIT: Current RayMarine C and E series can run either North or Course up

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:00 -0400, Gerald wrote:

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
g...

I haven't tried Fugawi, but I'd like to. I'm convinced vector charts
are the way to go.

And I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that,
perhaps, I am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of
'old-fart'. I am in the process of looking at some current generation
chart plotters to go on a new boat. I haven't paid much attention to
marine electronics in the past 6 or 7 years since I outfitted my last
boat. It has surprised my that every non-pc based chart plotter out
there is vector based --- no one has done one to support raster.

This is because raster charts take too much processing power and memory
for simple, low-power devices like handheld plotters. Vector charts also
render much faster on all devices, for instant loading, zooming and
panning.

I have been using paper charts for nearly 55 years. My last 2 boats had
PC based systems (Maptech and/or Cap'n). I found that having chart
images on my screen that looked exactly like the charts on my nav table
was a BIG plus.

There's nothing wrong with a personal preference. A lot of people
prefer traditional charts.

One thing I like about paper/raster charts is that you know when you've
reached their limit of resolution, because the picture gets grainy.
Vector charts can be too smooth at their limit. They're supposed to have
a warning label to tell you when you've zoomed in too far, but I think the
grainy picture is more intuitive.

BTW, I usually have a paper chart open too, along with my electronic one.

It has been my experience that vector charts have less information on
them than raster charts. While some see this as an advantage I do not:
one mans clutter is another mans important data. Most of the vector
charts that I have looked at do not show light characteristics: you
need to point to it to get a pop up. That makes absolutely no sense to
me. Having to manage my vessel and putz around with a pointing device
trying to find the light with a 6 second flash is somewhere between dumb
and dangerous. Raster charts have all the information right there with
no screwing around. Vector technology salesmen take great pride in
their products' ability to remove layers of information to 'unclutter'
the screen. When they demo this feature, all I see being removed is
information I deem important.

This is all a function of the plotter software, not vector charts
themselves. Vector charts are basically a database, which can hold many
more layers of information than raster charts. Which information gets
shown is decided by the software designer, and then the user. But as
you've found, software designers often make poor choices!

My understanding of the vector chart
manufacturing process is that they all start out with the raster charts.
So they do not have any more accurate or timely information. In fact
the process of going from one format to the other has been known to
introduce errors.

Actually it's the other way around. The new master format is a database,
which can be updated in whole or in part, have layers added, etc. -- like
GIS for the sea. Charts can be rendered from this in vector or raster
formats.

Let me say at this point that I am a retired geek. I have spent most of
my life playing around with the then current technologies. I still
consider my self to be pretty much of a geek. So I am not afraid of
something new. I had great hope for vector charting. but IMHO, that
promise has yet to be fulfilled. The biggest failure of this technology
is in not being able to provide timely updates. With digital, it should
be a simple matter to push out weekly (daily ??) NTM updates via the
internet. This is something I had been able to do with the MapTech Pro
service . Each week I would get NTM updates to 100% of my charts. Now,
you can download them yourself for free. Not with vector charts.

Actually the technology allows much easier updating. Whether they're
doing it or not is another story, but apparently they are. Some info:

http://www.nauticalcharts.com/fugawi-c.htm

So, less information, less accurate information, less usable
information, what am I missing? Am I really getting that far out of
touch?

Not really. I don't think the promise has been realized either, but
that's the fault of the software marketers, not vector charting itself.

Matt O.

Raster vs Vector (Was Electronic Charting)
 

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:00 -0400, Gerald wrote:

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
g...

I haven't tried Fugawi, but I'd like to. I'm convinced vector charts
are the way to go.

And I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that,
perhaps, I am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of
'old-fart'. I am in the process of looking at some current generation
chart plotters to go on a new boat. I haven't paid much attention to
marine electronics in the past 6 or 7 years since I outfitted my last
boat. It has surprised my that every non-pc based chart plotter out
there is vector based --- no one has done one to support raster.

This is because raster charts take too much processing power and memory
for simple, low-power devices like handheld plotters. Vector charts also
render much faster on all devices, for instant loading, zooming and
panning.

True but - I have used both Cap'n and the Maptech Offshore Navigator
programs on mid range Dell Tower machines. I have never had a load, zoom or
pan action that was not totally satisfactory. I buy the argument, but am not
sure I see the value. I accept that all of the marketing hype is true:
faster loading, panning, quilting, better resolution, ability to surpress
layers, etc. My issue with all this is that I have no problems that these
features fix.

I have been using paper charts for nearly 55 years. My last 2 boats had
PC based systems (Maptech and/or Cap'n). I found that having chart
images on my screen that looked exactly like the charts on my nav table
was a BIG plus.

There's nothing wrong with a personal preference. A lot of people
prefer traditional charts.

Along with a mild case of "I have always done it that way..."


One thing I like about paper/raster charts is that you know when you've
reached their limit of resolution, because the picture gets grainy.
Vector charts can be too smooth at their limit. They're supposed to have
a warning label to tell you when you've zoomed in too far, but I think the
grainy picture is more intuitive.

True but -- In my experience, I cannot remember having to zoom in on any
chart so far that the picture became too grainy. At some point in the
zooming process, long before grain becomes an issue, you can see all the
detail there is to see. While the vector chart can theoretically zoom down
to feet with out showing grain, there will be nothing of interest at that
level of zoom that is of interest. This is one of those feature that the
demo guys like to show at boat shows: nice to demo - yes --- something I
have ever needed to do in the real world - no. Most charts are not that
accurate to begin with. Somewhere the line between precision and accuracy
becomes an issue. If the issue is being able to scale down from a very large
scale map down to a buoy on a harbor sacale chart, the major raster chart
programs will do that automatically for you at satisfactory speeds. Again,
I do buy the argument, but I am not sure I see the value on a PC based
system. On a less powerfull dedicated chartplotter, this is clearly an
issue.


BTW, I usually have a paper chart open too, along with my electronic one.

Good man! Me to - always. Belts and suspenders.


It has been my experience that vector charts have less information on
them than raster charts. While some see this as an advantage I do not:
one mans clutter is another mans important data. Most of the vector
charts that I have looked at do not show light characteristics: you
need to point to it to get a pop up. That makes absolutely no sense to
me. Having to manage my vessel and putz around with a pointing device
trying to find the light with a 6 second flash is somewhere between dumb
and dangerous. Raster charts have all the information right there with
no screwing around. Vector technology salesmen take great pride in
their products' ability to remove layers of information to 'unclutter'
the screen. When they demo this feature, all I see being removed is
information I deem important.

This is all a function of the plotter software, not vector charts
themselves. Vector charts are basically a database, which can hold many
more layers of information than raster charts. Which information gets
shown is decided by the software designer, and then the user. But as
you've found, software designers often make poor choices!

My understanding of the vector chart
manufacturing process is that they all start out with the raster charts.
So they do not have any more accurate or timely information. In fact
the process of going from one format to the other has been known to
introduce errors.

Actually it's the other way around. The new master format is a database,
which can be updated in whole or in part, have layers added, etc. -- like
GIS for the sea. Charts can be rendered from this in vector or raster
formats.

Let me say at this point that I am a retired geek. I have spent most of
my life playing around with the then current technologies. I still
consider my self to be pretty much of a geek. So I am not afraid of
something new. I had great hope for vector charting. but IMHO, that
promise has yet to be fulfilled. The biggest failure of this technology
is in not being able to provide timely updates. With digital, it should
be a simple matter to push out weekly (daily ??) NTM updates via the
internet. This is something I had been able to do with the MapTech Pro
service . Each week I would get NTM updates to 100% of my charts. Now,
you can download them yourself for free. Not with vector charts.

Actually the technology allows much easier updating. Whether they're
doing it or not is another story, but apparently they are. Some info:

http://www.nauticalcharts.com/fugawi-c.htm

I didn't see any details on updating. With the Maptech Pro service, I would
get a weekly download for an entire region, run an update program and 100 or
so charts would be brought up to date. I subscribed to 3 regions, so I had
three buttons to push. It doesn't get significantly easier than that.

But, that is not my point. That should have been available for digital
formats all along. It should be available for digital formats now. The ENC
charts the web reference point to are new and, as of now, incomplete. I
doubt that any of the update facilities will be available to anyone using
chartplotters for quite awhile. In time I am confident that this promise
will be met.


So, less information, less accurate information, less usable
information, what am I missing? Am I really getting that far out of
touch?

Not really. I don't think the promise has been realized either, but
that's the fault of the software marketers, not vector charting itself.


Fault is not relevant. The promise hasn't been met --- yet. It will be.

In any event, ready for prime time or not, vector charts are clearly here to
stay. Since my next boat will have a dedicated chartplotter on it, I will
be using vector charts. Hopefully the adaptation process will not be to
long or painful.

I think the real promise of the next generation will be when the
manufacturers (software / firmware) open their systems up to allow the user
to merge third party files. How cool would it be if you could buy a fishing
layer that held good fishing locations? Or a SCUBA overlay for dive sites?
Or if you could purchase very up to date soundings for an inlet or area of
the ICW prone to shifting and shoaling? A third party marina and facilities
database would probably sell well. Restaurants. West Marine would
certainly offer a layer with all their stores located. I could send you my
favorite anchorage locations if you send me yours --- AS a user defined
overlay layer. And so on.....


Matt O.