Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Antietam on the Web waking up ...
I'm actually working at a level higher--ideas that could be displayable
on a web page, or could be a downloadable application, etc., but
not specifically targeted for any particular medium. I am increasingly
looking toward GPS (global positioning systems) applications. For example,
you could download a map of the battlefield (showing troop positions
at a certain time) onto your GPS unit, and then 'navigate' yourself
around points of interest that would not otherwise be visible on
the modern battlefield.
What I am doing with the Cope maps is to capture the troop positions
in terms of geographical coordinates (e.g. latitude & longitude, but
I'm actually using a different coordinate system that has much finer
resolution). Once such a database is built up, all kinds of things
are possible. As is, the Cope maps are arranged chronologically:
snapshots of troop positions taken at 14 points in time. It might
be interesting to instead generate a map that shows the various positions
of a certain unit (or set of units) across the entire day.
I don't like using the Cope maps themselves as a base map, for
a variety of reasons. I like to work in layers. There should
be a layer that contains just the boundaries of the fields &
features; there should be a layer containing the elevation (contour
lines or whatever); there should be a layer that contains troop
positions; a layer of labels and text, etc. For a given need,
you produce the layers you are interested in. The Cope maps are
a finished map, so all the layers flattened down, and the results
can be quite cluttered; you can't get rid of the things you
don't want to see. For example, it is usually desirable to
show contour lines at an increment (e.g. every 20 feet, or every
10 feet, etc.) appropriate for the scale of the map. If the
increment is too small the lines overlap and overwhelm or obliterate
the rest of the map. Since the contour lines are actually on
the Cope map, it is not possible to substitute contours of a different
The other problem with the Cope maps is that they suffer from
horizontal distortions. If you produced a modern map to the
same scale and overlaid it and 1 of the Cope maps, you could
get features close together to line up, but not ones far
apart (you'd never be able to line up the Smoketown Road
and Miller's Sawmill road). For an illustration, see
This kind of detail may seem irrelevant for a web page. For
other applications, however, it is critical. For example, people
are increasingly starting to employ GPS
technology to their field work. It would be desirable to be able
to download these maps to a GPS unit. Because of the Cope
maps horizontal distortions, it would not be suitable to download
them to a GPS unit.
This is not to say I don't like the Cope maps. Actually,
I have a real set of my own. Not a repro, but an actual
1904 volume. The thing is huge! You have not experienced
these beautiful maps until you have browsed through a full
I have had for several years a nice, horizontally accurate
database containing the base Antietam map (field boundaries
and features as per 1862) and a nice digital 5 foot increment
contour map. Once I have info on the troop positions, I'll
be 1 step closer to something interesting.
I have no experience with Flash. I am leaning more toward Java.
If you are going to assume that people have the Flash plugin,
I'd just as well assume they have the Java plugin, which
is much more useful. If the browser was too confining, I'd
just move to a download able Java application.
At first glance, it does seem like we have wildly different
approaches. Nonetheless, there ought to be a way to find some
Brian Downey wrote:
> Hi Todd,
> Yes, I'm using the LoC provided MrSid viewer at home, but not the
> photoshop plugin. I'm a macromedia shop just now :)
> My approach to "optimizing" these for display on the Web is pretty low
> tech, really. My plan is to create a base map - a bitmap graphic - on
> the order of 500px square, for each of 3 or 4 major sections of the
> battlefield, and overlay vector-graphic symbols for the military units
> and other items of interest. [My first attempt at such a base map, in
> this case of the entire field and with text overlayed, is at
> http://aotw.org/overview.php%5d In Flash I can use these symbols as
> hyperlinks to narratives, unit and leader information, and other
> data-based material. I can also 'animate' the symbols from one time
> frame to the next to better show operations over the course of the
> day. Because most of the presentation uses small vector-mapped objects
> or is coming from the database on-demand, I ought to be able to keep
> the client-side "thin" and load times small. That's the plan, anyway.
> A couple of years ago I would not have seriously considered Flash - I
> was something of an HTML purist - but it looks like most web users
> have the Flash plugin now, and can readily use that kind of display.
> I'm a raw amateur in Flash to this point, however, so this might take
> a while!
> Thanks for asking, tho the rest of the group are probably bored to
> tears ... at the risk of making it worse, what's involved in your
> project? [Perhaps a moderator should step in and recommend we take
> this to email]
> --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, TR Livesey <tlivesey@w...> wrote:
> > Brian,
> > Are you using any of the Mr.Sid accessory tools in viewing the LOC maps?
> > If you have photoshop, you can download (free) a MrSid plugin, which
> > you to download the whole map (all 14 of 'em), and then interactively
> > zoom and pan all you like off-line. Very nice set of tools.
> > I have had an on-again/off-again project for taking the Carman-Cope maps
> > and bringing up to date with some new technology. Let me know if you
> > want to 'talk shop'.
> > Regards,
> > TR Livesey
> > tlivesey@w...
> > http://www.westwoodgalleries.com/antietam
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Dang, Todd -
Your project indeed sounds like it has excellent potential for use on
--- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, TR Livesey <tlivesey@w...> wrote:
> Very interesting.
> I'm actually working at a level higher--ideas that could be
displayable ... <snip>
And yes, I think there might be some common threads between our
approaches. I'd say our fundamental differences in approach are the
result of our end-goals, but the two techniques might have some
I'll get back to you by email, if that's ok, rather than bore the rest
of the group with this topic.
> This is not to say I don't like the Cope maps. Actually,
> I have a real set of my own. Not a repro, but an actual
> 1904 volume. The thing is huge! You have not experienced
> these beautiful maps until you have browsed through a full
> sized copy.
This is fantastic! I'd love to have a copy, but haven't seen one for
sale yet. How did you come upon yours, if I may ask?
<more stuff snipped>
> TR Livesey
email name: bdowney
- Brian Downey wrote:
> > This is not to say I don't like the Cope maps. Actually,Where else? All together class...EBAY!
> > I have a real set of my own. Not a repro, but an actual
> > 1904 volume. The thing is huge! You have not experienced
> > these beautiful maps until you have browsed through a full
> > sized copy.
> This is fantastic! I'd love to have a copy, but haven't seen one for
> sale yet. How did you come upon yours, if I may ask?