(Sorry that names are in Swedish, my mother tongue, and probably not very relevant for this forum.)
1 Like
Yeah, it can vary a lot from place to place. They use different imagery vendors. I’m in a good spot because my city gets a 6" leaf-off imagery flight every few years and shares it with the folks who make ArcGIS. In rural areas, they’ll often use the USDA imagery that gets flow every few years, which is lower resolution (1’, I think), and they also buy imagery from some other companies. Urban areas are usually pretty good. Google tends to be a little more consistent from place to place, but they don’t usually have the really crisp imagery. They also try to give a 3D look to the imagery in some places, which looks cool but can distort it and make it a little fuzzy.
The screenshot you shared looks like they sharpened a lower resolution imagery. This sort of helps, but the image can still be pretty blurry and the pixels are super obvious.
Note: By 6" and 1’, I’m referring to the size of the pixels. In 6" imagery, each pixel covers an approximately 6" square. There’s some variation just because of the vagaries of flight paths, changing elevations, etc, but it’s a good estimate. Within a given resolution, some imagery vendors just produce cleaner results (better focus, contrast, etc,).
1 Like
I don’t do nothing nothing high tech. I just grow a few trees.
1 Like
I used excel where every cell is 5ft x 5ft. I like the point and grunt interface and drag and drop.
Orchard layout Drip Tape Irrigation.xlsx (64.4 KB)
