Resolution and Printing

Travis Scott's Avatar

Travis Scott

19 Aug, 2014 12:59 PM

Is there a way to increase the resolution of the google imagery for printing? I noticed that when I zoom in, the imagery changes to more detailed tiles, and then when you zoom back out, the resolution reduces again. I need to print some large maps and would like a higher resolution than is provided at that view. Is this possible?

  1. Support Staff 1 Posted by bFlood on 19 Aug, 2014 01:05 PM

    bFlood's Avatar

    the best way to get decent exports/prints is to use the Google HD layer, it attempts to use the lowest possible tile level for your extent. it also uses a local WMS service instead of tiles so the resulting image (pixels) is a lot larger, sometimes this is not noticeable on screen but it does make for better looking prints

    other then that, you would have to purchase the area (per/KM) directly from Google using their new Google Imagery service. You would then get access to the raw imagery data for download

    cheers
    brian

  2. 2 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 01:08 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    Also, I am using a trial license for a few days to see if our office can use this package. I have the 'Trial' watermarks on the imagery as well. Will the google imagery resolution and clarity improve/change at all once I move to a full license?

  3. Support Staff 3 Posted by bFlood on 19 Aug, 2014 01:10 PM

    bFlood's Avatar

    can you send a sample of what you are seeing? the resolution for the HD layer should be pretty good. if you cannot send an example, can you send the exact lat/lng and map scale so I can test here?

    thanks
    brian

  4. 4 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 01:14 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    -95.558471 29.546707 Decimal Degrees at a scale of 1:4014
    you can see a school with good clarity but the imagery is a little fuzzy still (looks like jpg lossiness for example)

    Same Location but a scale of ~1:20,000 the entire area just looks a bit unsharp/unclear

  5. Support Staff 5 Posted by bFlood on 19 Aug, 2014 01:34 PM

    bFlood's Avatar

    hi travis

    here are two exports using the Satellite layer and the Satellite HD layer. the Satellite layer, which is a tile layer that is controlled by ArcMap, does appear to have fuzzy areas, mainly because the map scale does not match the map scales at whcih the tiles were drawn. IMO, ArcMap chooses the wrong tile level in most cases, I think they went for speed (less tiles) over resolution (more tiles) when drawing base maps

    that being said, the Google HD layer export looks good to me. If this is not high enough resolution for you then you're only option is to order your areas from Google directly. This will give you the highest quality imagery data (since its the raw data) but it comes at a price

    cheers
    brian

  6. 6 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 03:25 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    Ok, thank you. I will test some prints and see how it comes out.

  7. 7 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:16 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    I tested the imagery printing our large maps and it used low quality imagery and looked rather 'fuzzy' or out of focus with poor detail. So I printed it to PDF so I could send it to you. Here is a screen grab of a pdf map viewed at 100%. The map itself is a 42" square pdf and is printed at a resolution of 1:15,558 around this location:
    -96.800632 33.147171 Decimal Degrees
    The resulting PDF file is too large to upload (exported at 300 DPI and "Normal output image quality), so I made a screen grab of the imagery from the PDF to show you the resulting resolution.

    Since the map covers such a large geographic area (12x12 miles), I am assuming that Arc or Google are choosing the low quality tiles to render it. Is there any workaround for this? Or some way to pre-load all of the higher resolution tiles or specify a standard view ratio to print from?

    Everything else about the package is great. This is the only major concern preventing us from pulling the trigger for a multi-user license. We need to be able to print large maps with decent imagery resolution... I'll stop bothering you after this. Just making sure I am not missing anything since this is the only real hang up..

  8. 8 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:17 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    attachment doesn't seem to have come across.

  9. Support Staff 9 Posted by bFlood on 19 Aug, 2014 06:20 PM

    bFlood's Avatar

    hi travis

    that does not look right, can you send me a sample MXD with the exact layout/map extent you tested?

    does the pdf resolution in the HD sample export I uploaded look good for your purposes?

    thanks
    brian

  10. 10 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:21 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    My apologies, data behind the map page is at a 1:76,062 ratio..

  11. 11 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:24 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    the HD helped, but look at the MXD and tell me what you think.

  12. 12 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:25 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    MXD

  13. 13 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:26 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    Go to the layout view and view the map at 100%. You will see that it is not very clear or sharp.

  14. 14 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 06:27 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    Here is a screen grab of my map looking at the layout view at 100%

  15. Support Staff 15 Posted by bFlood on 19 Aug, 2014 06:46 PM

    bFlood's Avatar

    hi travis

    yes, you can safely ignore how the imagery looks in ArcMap layout view, that is not how it will reflected in the final output.

    that being said, when I exported your MXD it did create a 106MB pdf that looked pretty good (much better then you screen grab) but not as crisp as smaller sized exports. I think we are running up against the max WMS size used by the layer. I'll see what I can do on this end to increase the resolution on large plots

    also, like I mentioned earlier, there is the Google imagery program if needed

    cheers
    brian

  16. 16 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 07:09 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    I tried exporting maps using all variety of settings and have not been able to get the program to use the more detailed imagery tiles unfortunately.. It does sound like we are hitting a barrier here.

    Yes, I know of the imagery program and we have evaluated it. However we think this package (minus this issue) would be a better fit for us.

    One further question while you research this. Is it possible to lighten up the imagery other than just making it transparent? Thank you again!

  17. 17 Posted by Travis Scott on 19 Aug, 2014 07:18 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    FYI, I wouldn't need the always use the higher resolution/crisp/sharp imagery while working and panning around in Arc. It would only be for printing. I envision a setting that pulls out the lower tiles for printing only, or something of the sort..

  18. 18 Posted by Travis Scott on 11 Sep, 2014 06:16 PM

    Travis Scott's Avatar

    Did you ever find anything on this subject? Any chance for higher resolution prints?

  19. Support Staff 19 Posted by bFlood on 11 Sep, 2014 07:23 PM

    bFlood's Avatar

    hi travis

    for large plots, no. the current resolution is all we will be serving right now. the resolution for smaller sized exports/prints seems to be reasonable enough

    we may add a special custom layer to handle this in the future but for now we will continue to only serve WMS for this layer

    sorry, cheers
    brian

  20. 20 Posted by Michael on 22 Dec, 2014 02:30 PM

    Michael's Avatar

    I am having the same issue. My area is 10 miles by 10 miles and the GE imagery is a better view than NAIP imagery for my purposes mainly due to the time of year that the GE imagery represents. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  21. 21 Posted by edward.jackson on 22 Jun, 2017 02:41 PM

    edward.jackson's Avatar

    I noticed this thread is from 2014. I'm having the same issue and am wandering if there is a fix at this point. I'd like to be able to print out clear aerials for a wall map of an area including a few square miles. However, the imagery is not as sharp as it gets when zoomed in. It seems like there should be a tweak where you can make the imagery from the closer zoom level soak in for larger maps. I understand the file would be larger. but...

    you mentioned being able to get the imagery directly from google. How do you do this? How much does it cost? And would that make a difference?

  22. 22 Posted by Michael Davis on 22 Jun, 2017 02:57 PM

    Michael Davis's Avatar

    What I did was zoom to the detail level I wanted and then exported to a jpeg. Then I added the image I just exported and georeferenced it. I kept scrolling the map around the area I ultimately wanted and doing exports and georeferencing the exports. Essentially, I made my own tiles. Does that make sense?

  23. 23 Posted by Michael Davis on 22 Jun, 2017 02:59 PM

    Michael Davis's Avatar

    I also need to mention I didn’t use Arc2Earth. I did everything within ArcMap using PortableBaseMapServer and Google Earth Imagery directly. You can find PBS here...

    https://geopbs.codeplex.com/

  24. 24 Posted by Michael Davis on 22 Jun, 2017 03:02 PM

    Michael Davis's Avatar

    Be advised the Google Earth Imagery is for non-commercial use only. My project was personal.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Michael Davis
    Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:00 AM
    To: '[email blocked]' <[email blocked]>
    Subject: RE: Resolution and Printing [Questions]

    I also need to mention I didn’t use Arc2Earth. I did everything within ArcMap using PortableBaseMapServer and Google Earth Imagery directly. You can find PBS here...

    https://geopbs.codeplex.com/

  25. 25 Posted by edward.jackson on 22 Jun, 2017 06:33 PM

    edward.jackson's Avatar

    I haven't used Portable BaseMap Server before. I'll check it out.

    Arc2Earth is the only way I currently access google imagery within ArcMap. It looks like making tiles as you did and stitching them back together on the larger map will work - quite a hassle though.

    Thanks, Edward

  26. 26 Posted by Michael Davis on 22 Jun, 2017 08:09 PM

    Michael Davis's Avatar

    It was the only way I could figure out how to do it. Keep in mind you don’t really have to stitch them together. All you have to do is georefernce each tile.

  27. 27 Posted by edward.jackson on 22 Jun, 2017 08:40 PM

    edward.jackson's Avatar

    That's what I meant. I started doing it and it looks like it's working.

  28. jflood3 closed this discussion on 23 Aug, 2017 12:16 PM.

Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.

Keyboard shortcuts

Generic

? Show this help
ESC Blurs the current field

Comment Form

r Focus the comment reply box
^ + ↩ Submit the comment

You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac