Autor Thema: Black Borders and block lists  (Gelesen 3278 mal)


  • Gast
Black Borders and block lists
« am: 01 Juni 2017, 07:37:29 »
All of my folders contain images in merc low projections which are all contiguous so one each folder matches up exactly with the next folder.

I created two raster filters.  One is for 1m and 2m and the second is for 4m.

I am finding that in some cases I have black borders around a folder of images at the 1, 2 and 4m zoom levels even though the folder is well inside the boundary of the Filters.  I have no idea why this is occurring.  If I take the images in the affected folder and move them into into the contiguous folder (combining them) the problem goes away but can occur where that new larger folder joins a different one.  But then it takes much longer to run and this issue seems to be in various areas instead of just a single area.

What would cause this?

Also, we attempted to create a 1m, 2m and 4m block lists to see exactly where the blocks for each level are in relation to our filters and our imagery.  We were not able to get the block list to work.  It runs and creates a file with 0 bytes.     The shapefiles we loaded were in the merc low projection just like our imagery and we set the shape to AT5 to "m" to recognize that with the proper path.   What is the trick to this?  The tool says a slash is required at the end but we have no idea what that means.  The instructions we have are sparsely worded at best as is the case with most IMC instructions.   We tried it with no slashes, back slashes and forward slashes after .shp and all returned the same no result.   For lack of being able to see exactly where blocks are for each level, dealing with these black borders is a major hassle.  We are working to fill the black areas with raster to avoid it.  The alpha filter seems to us to be not good tool as you have no idea where it is going to cut your raster.  With no detailed explanation available about this, we set it to 65000 to see what would happen and it cut out all of the raster.  Then we set it to 1 and it still cut large raster pieces in various areas which created an unacceptable result.  It sure would be nice to have a tool built into this software that could be uses to easily avoid any black borders.  Any unused or partially used blocks outside of a filter boundary should automatically be transparent instead of black (that would be nice anyway).

Offline gregory

  • Insight Map Creator
  • *
  • Beiträge: 854
Re: Black Borders and block lists
« Antwort #1 am: 01 Juni 2017, 15:57:21 »
The settings for the block list process in ShapeToAt5 are pipe delimited.  Slash would not work as a delimiter because the setting expects folder locations.

For ShapeToAt5, you need to be contacting Navico for support directly.

Your issue on the IMC is likely because you are not including both folders as source folders.


  • Gast
Re: Black Borders and block lists
« Antwort #2 am: 01 Juni 2017, 21:34:16 »
Of course we will continue to try to see if we can get our problem resolved at Navico support but so far, it has been a very protracted and slow inefficient process that has not worked well for most questions.   Unfortunately, the insight provided there is most of the time insufficient to get issues completely fixed.   As you may know, Support at Navico directly for IMC questions has been a tough prospect for quite some time.   Many I have spoken with over the last year or so who use the IMC have given up there and recognize they are pretty much on their own.  It didn't used to be that way a few years ago but it is now.  The fastest response today is usually 24 hours - 36 hours, sometimes questions are totally ignored with no response at all, they are not available via phone (only email), sometimes we find the person is not well informed on the question and sometimes provides an answer that we know is not correct.  Also, often questions are only partially answered creating more questions which takes days longer to get answered.  It seems to me proper support should be set up with screen sharing ability along with phone communications to vet more complicated issues so a specialist can see what the user sees and is best able to offer a solution to the problem.  That is the way it is at Global Mapper, ESRI, ERDAS, and most GIS software companies.  If you have a problem, someone is able to log in to your PC and help you with it and speak with you directly.  It works and issues can be fixed very quickly with positive results.  Dealing the complicated software like the IMC which for some versions has limited or no written instructions can't really be supported properly via email. 

What is provided at this time at Navico for IMC is better than nothing but it is highly inefficient and often ineffective.  I suppose that is why people come to this board in hopes they can get faster or better insight.  I have learned a few things from reading posts here.  I say if they are going to provide support for something, they should do it right.  Even they who manage the support person or persons acknowledged to me last year it is "not ideal".  We don't understand the company management's perspective on the design of this support paradigm as one of the advantages and selling points of the product line is directly related to mapping options vs. other mfgs., who provide fewer or no mapping options.  At the last boat show I attende, mapping options were a selling point that all of the Navico sales reps were using.  That is a major advantage that should be further exploited and the best the way to do that is to provide great support to their customers who want to make their own maps or make them and sell them to others further solidifying the brand.   Charts are highly important and great charts are highly valued by customers.   To that end, it seems logical to me that IMC support should be a priority.

Mfgs are always trying to create the next bell or whistle to add to their units to somehow gain an edge on the other guy.  A better resolution and fancier screen, a clearer sonar etc.  What I find so puzzling is they seem to focus all on the units themselves and ignore the charts.  Before they are anything else, they are chart plotters and they are only as useful to the user as what is actually displayed on the screen which for the most part is a Chart.  Sonar aside, it doesn't matter how fancy the unit is if the chart is bad and there are plenty of bad charts out there.  My local Navico sales rep hates the Insight Charts and told me he thinks they are really bad in terms of detail etc.  I get that.  Depending on the area, some charts are much better than others.  Since that is a fact and because the Unit is only as useful as the Chart the user is staring at it would seem the company would put far more emphasis into developing more and better chart options.  Perhaps the CMap acquisition was made with this in mind but like Navionics, they map the world and can't begin to create some of the highly detailed maps that others make or could make with the IMC for their local areas.  IMC support is a great investment in customer retention along with continued improvements to the IMC software to make it easier to make charts.  For instance, I think a great tool to add to the IMC is a black border eliminator.  Let the tool do all the work.  As it is, a raster filter option does not solve that problem and the alpha filter does not solve it either and could create undesired results if used.    For instance I tried the Alpha filter 1 on a trial and it cut out important raster I need to keep on.  I guess you have to marry all of that trial and error with a block list to see what is happening and hopefully all of that will get you further along toward manipulating your data to hopefully eliminate the black areas.  But creating a block list isn't working so well for us either.  We follow the instructions provided with no luck for such a simple Shape2At5 tool and no idea why it does not work.   OK.. rant over...back to trial and error and Navico emails.