this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
375 points (92.5% liked)

Cool Guides

4655 readers
3 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ulvain@sh.itjust.works 106 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Everything reminds me of her

[–] No_Eponym@lemmy.ca 5 points 11 months ago

Giggity giggity!

[–] Deebster@programming.dev 98 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

I always found these very intuitive, but I don't know if that's just due to having an analytical mind, or just learning this stuff early. Do people struggle to understand topographic maps?

[–] DrMango@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think your analytical mind got "typographic" and "topographic" mixed up...

[–] Deebster@programming.dev 20 points 11 months ago

Ah, was it a typo or topo that got autocorrected? We'll never know (fixed, ta).

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

usually topografic maps are a bit more complex so I feel like this guide is useless

[–] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 months ago

It gives a basic idea, but I think something like Cities:Skylines where you can create maps using a height map and then get the topography lines in a 3d space where you can actively shift the camera around to see them overlaid from any angle would probably help people grasp the idea.

Having said that, I'm now imagining drone footage overlaid with the height maps as an additional resource to standard topographical maps. Would be neat if somebody could create software that could calculate and overlay the height maps in real-time using the drone's altimeter or something.

[–] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 11 months ago

In the Land Nav portion of PLDC (US Army training for becoming a Sergeant - is called something else now) there were soooooo many people that failed out/had to do it over again, that I was super worried when I did it. Seemed pretty damn easy to me. 🤷

[–] sixCats@lemmy.dbzer0.com 79 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Except all of the hills could be valleys, you need to see the numbers on the contours

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 35 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If it were a local depression instead of a hill, the lines would be hatch-marked on the side pointing into to depression.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 19 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Do you have an example, I either never have seen this or never had a depression on a map

[–] misterdoctor@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You want an example of local depression just swing by my place anytime

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago
[–] IlliteratiDomine@infosec.pub 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Here's a slide describing how depressions are represented, and here is a topographical map of a sinkhole showing the hashes.

That said, I had to look pretty hard for a map with those marks. Numbers are much more common.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago

Ah, awesome. i appreciate you taking the time to put this together. I dont recall these on maps, but as you said numbers are common. And i typically use the topomap with shading, so shading helps with understanding the terrain

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sixCats@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

That’s interesting, ordinance survey (in the UK) don’t do that, so it isn’t a universal standard

In the UK, you have to notice that the heights are reducing

[–] JoShmoe@lemmy.zip 24 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I was expecting boobs for the last one. They’re almost there too.

[–] Th4tGuyII@kbin.social 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Imagine being down bad enough to get off on a topological map ...

[–] JoShmoe@lemmy.zip 9 points 11 months ago

Ok, what should I imagine next?

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Yeah, very confusing to see an image like this that isn't a smart-ass meme.

[–] RatsOffToYa@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago

The Grand Tetons are named after boobs (grands tétons is roughly "big tits" in French)

[–] JustMy2c@lemm.ee 22 points 11 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gullible@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’ve always been curious about topographical maps that involve curved or hanging terrain and whether there’s a way to denote the existence of an area beneath. That’s obviously going to be irrelevant 99.9% of the time, but grade school curiosity rarely fades completely.

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 22 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The rare overhang distinct enough to be captured in topography is i dicated by a brown dotted line in usgs maps

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago
[–] essellburns@beehaw.org 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Those all look vaguely sexual to me.

[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

My brother in Rorschach, you are not alone.

[–] dmention7@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago

Hey, 111000 is the one who keeps showing us all the sexy pictures!

[–] Th4tGuyII@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

Tell you what, if this ever comes up in a psychological evaluation I'm fucked...

"Tell me, what do you see here?"

"A damn fine rack is what"

[–] finnspiration@sopuli.xyz 10 points 11 months ago

I made an improved condensed version of this that still gets the point across drawn graphic a single lonely hill, below it another graphic of high hill with a smaller hill on the right side, below it graphic of two high standing hills beside each other, below it graphic of a high hill with another hill that has fallen and is flat

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Also it helps to look at water on the map. Water always runs downhill. Runs combine to form creeks, creeks combine to form rivers, rivers pour into oceans and lakes. Water gets bigger on its way downhill. The dead end is a spring, it flows downhill from there

[–] DroneRights@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago
[–] AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (3 children)

For the second one, do you need that many rings? Would using less still be correct?

[–] nymwit@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

Depends on the rest of the map. These are usually set up so the rings mean a certain consistent difference in elevation, say 1ft of 10ft. You don't normally change the spacing partway through the map. If the intervals were 10ft and this was a 20ft peak then you'd obviously have fewer rings than if the intervals were 1ft.

[–] OceanSoap@lemmy.ml 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The rings are elevation placements. Less would be "correct in that they'd still signify elevations, it's just less detailed.

For example, the widest ring might be an elevation of 2470ft while the smallest ring might be 2570ft. If there are no rings in between, it's still correct, you're just not getting very detailed. You could easily be looking at a perfect sloap on all sides, like a smooth cone. But place 9 rings in between at 10ft more of elevation each, you've got a much more detailed idea of how a mountain or hill is shaped.

So, correct, but not very useful.

[–] emptiestplace@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Utility may be subjective, but sloap perfection is forever.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] verbalbotanics@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago

This is pretty helpful for something like Zelda for me

load more comments
view more: next ›