Road visibility at lower zoomlevels
  • While the level of map-details during 3D-navigation is absolutely perfect form me, it isn’t in 2D-mode. As mentioned in at least two earlier threads the visibility of roads in lower zoomlevels is very minimalistic. This makes route planning with Mapfactor Navigator rather difficult, compared with other PC-based tools. A few samples to show what I mean (along a route from Gries am Brenner to Bozen):

    1) Original map colour scheme „Autopilot Day (large fonts) ==> mfn_default
    2) Changed scheme (modified roads and fonts larger, but zoomlevel-visibility doesn’t change ==> mfn_tweaked
    3) From, lower zoomlevel than my MFN-examples, but nevertheless much more roads to see (this for me means that it is not an OSM issue but MFN-caused) ==> osrm

    Maybe I am missing something to customize this behaviour myself, perhaps someone can tell me. Otherwise for better usability I’m requesting an appropriate change.

    Regards, James
  • 18 Comments sorted by
  • Not clear what I mean?
  • you cannot customise zoom levels, they are optimised for faster display
  • Some dedicated Garmin GPS units have a very useful feature/ setting whereby you can increase/ decrease the level of display detail at any zoom level. This is very handy when zoomed out for cycle route planning - turn up the detail so that more minor roads can still be displayed. It is also very useful in some places where there are very few roads/ features anyway like in the countryside. Sometimes the tradeoff for slower display may be a price worth paying, and the user can decide.

    I know for the developer it is a difficult balance between confusing the user with too many confusing settings/ allowing them to stuff things up, or having every operation automatic with no user control, and making compromises. Using the new Nokia/HERE app the developers seem to have chosen to reduce the number of settings and make everything automatic but I much prefer the "route" that Mapfactor have taken, giving their users more control over the app if they need it. Their routing works much better and is more flexible than any other app I have seen.
  • yes, it is a difficult balance, not to mention support when user set something incorrectly :-)
    you may be able to make some adjustments using Map editor
  • Hi Tomas, I’ve been using this map editor (respectively changed contents of configuration files manually) already a lot but wasn’t able to stop disappearing roads at (not so) higher zoom levels. To clarify my problem: I’m not complaining about at MapFactor Navigator when using it in 3D-navigation-mode, it’s only the „moving map“-function I’d like to be able to customize.

    Here is another example from an area I visited two years ago:

    Search for the center of Rejmyre in Sweden an zoom out until Rejmyre is in the upper right and Finspång in lower left. On my 7“-tablet this is a diagonal of about 20 km which is not really a big zoom level. The tablet shows no road north of Finspång, the PC-version also doesn’t. A road map without roads isn’t really what I want.

    For comparison the same area in and in OsmAnd. I wouldn’t need that much details as in the last screenshot but at least an indication of a road would be appreciated.
  • I agree with JambaFee.
    Also in his example: If I calculate a route from Rejmyre to Finspång I see a purple line on the map for the route, which is fine, but that's also the only thing I see.

    When you are in map view the map is in 2D. When I zoom out roads start to disappear really fast except from the motorways and trunks (Primary roads in MFN).
    I live in the Netherlands with a relatively dense motorway network (same for Germany, Belgium, France, UK) , but when you look in Sweden or Norway, it means that you don't have any roads left on your map.

    When you zoom out to a level where only the motorways and trunks are visible, the motorways are still an approximate 6-8 pixels wide with a colored inside and a lining, the trunks are thin lines. The trunk lines are also narrower then the inside of the motorways.

    For me it would also be nice if:
    - the motorways stay as they are (obviously), 
    - the trunks (primary roads in MFN) would be slighlty wider (like the inside of the motorways)
    - The major road (and possibly secondary roads) in their own color are dsiplayed in the current width of the trunk roads (Primary roads in MFN)
  • we all agree, but higher zoom levels means slower redrawing
  • I assume you mean: More details means slower redrawing.

    Exactly as JambaFee mentions: "While the level of map-details during 3D-navigation is absolutely perfect for me, it isn’t in 2D-mode".
    I agree a full 100% with him. During navigation it is perfect with the right amount of detail.

    However when you are preparing your trip(s) at home on the sofa and you want the overview, the rendering performance is less important, but the overview is. In that case you would like a little more detail, which is always at much lower zoomlevels. You are never in the lower zoomlevels when driving.

    Edit: We are not asking for more details in higher zoom modes while driving.
  • in navigation you see a lot less map features then in map view, zoom is quite high
    osmand is using raster maps, whereas we use vector - raster is bigger, but does not need so much computing power of a mobile device
  • No, OsmAnd is not using raster maps. OsmAnd is using vector maps in OsmAnd .obf format, but it can use raster maps. 
    OsmAnd maps are the most detailed ones of all OSM based navigation apps/maps. That's at the same time the big disadvantage. OsmAnd is really extremely CPU and memory hungry. It doesn't run well on my dual-core 1.3GHz 512MB phone.

    And I also think the amount of details is too high in OsmAnd when in navigation mode. That is also why I also mention that during navigation MNF is perfect with the right amount of detail.
  • The OsmAnd-Screenshot was made using default OBF-files = vector map.

    By the way: Could someone post a screenshot of the same area made with MFN using TomTom-maps?
  • what makes you think that OBF is vector?
    to my knowledge maps are raster and under that are vectors for routing, but not for display
  • :) Believe me Tomas, they are vector maps: Before I made the switch to MNF I was very deep into the the OBF maps being the "father" of a couple of special maps and maps that are now generally used. I wrote quite some wiki articles about it and I can explain the buildup of the files in detail. If you download OsmAnd and you check the "about" box you still see my name.
  • @hvdwolf: I already knew this article, now that I know it's from you I can tell you that I'm using this method, mainly to shrink the obf-files (a little bit) during creation.
  • Nevertheless: I'd like better using only one software and because of it's navigation capabilities this is in any case MFN.
  • Tomas says "we all agree, but higher zoom levels means slower redrawing"

    When I am preparing a route, as others have already said, and I've said too, I am very happy to have lower performance/ slower redrawing, if that is the price to pay for having more detail on the map. In sparsely populated areas the map is often blank until you zoom "right in" - when planning a route you may not even realize roads exists because of the lack of detail.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion