Originally posted by rfortson I'm thinking of buying one of these cheap $40 GPS data loggers and using it to geotag my images. What do people here use? Do you tag your raw files, or only your processed jpegs? Do you have problems with synchronizing the time between camera and GPS? What software is the best? Experiences, please.
BTW, I use Vista.
Ooooohhhhh.... Vista. Can't help you with that; I've been avoiding it like the plague for the time being.
General comments... On the software side, the tagging part of the workflow offers a considerable number of choices i.g. JetPhoto, Robogeo, Geosetter, and so on. Choose your poison. Some software out there will work with RAW; some will not. Add to that the fact there are a complex number of uses: do you just want good GIS data written to your images for sort of "orthorectifying" them in professional GIS software like ArcINFO, ArcIMS servers, etc? Or do you want an interface with Google Earth that displays nifty slideshows, creates webshows, etc?
Lots to choose from out there, for each according to their needs. Better yet, this area of technology seems to be evolving extremely rapidly. So if you don't like what's out there right now, wait a couple of months and the situation will likely be dramatically changed.
I can't give you any personal experience with any of the software/hardware as I am still fighting the battle of trying to figure out a way to get positions saved into images in other than Degrees/Minutes/Seconds format. That was a very short sighted move on the part of the EXIF steering group - playing with DMS instead of DD is a pain in the butt for one thing, and for another, long/lat is a vastly inferior spatial reference system for many applications. So I haven't played with any of these yet - I'm still looking and trying to select the best option for my professional needs. I'm hoping that once my programmer/RDBMS guru buddy gets back from Mexico, he'll be able to look at what's out there and come up with a solution for professional requirements.
But there's some interesting stuff out there to look at.
For a starting point, what do you plan on logging your spatial data with? I'm not going to cart even a small $5000+ Trimble GeoXH around with me just to capture a GPS movement track, much less a full size RTK unit. And I MIGHT be carrying a recreational grade Garmin Rino 530 with me if I also feel a need for other GPS mapping requirements. But how about something cheap for known places, places where their is no apparent need for other GPS applications, etc. I think a relatively inexpensive GPS datalogger might be just the ticket. Here's some options (indirectly already mentioned by Falconeye):
One example review:
Richard's Tech Reviews: AMOD AGL3080 Mac-compatible driverless GPS logger reviewed
A comparison of several units:
Richard's Tech Reviews: GPS logger comparison spreadsheet
The ever popular Amazon availability option:
Amazon.com: Amod AGL3080 GPS Data Logger (SiRF III, Driverless, 128MB, Push to Log) (Windows and Mac Image Software included): Everything Else
Somebody posted about buying a cheap Garmin to use as a datalogger. Advantages/disadvantages? Well, the smallest Garmin's aren't much bigger than the dataloggers. A little more expensive - but do any of the dataloggers have WAAS capability? Can a datalogger be used like a cheap Garmin mapping GPS to provide you with map enabled GPS support and navigation? Probably not.
Originally posted by Lowell Goudge The big issue with virtually all the present photo taggers is that for you to see your location, you need to be on the internet.
That is why I asked Garmin if they were interested in getting into this part of the software market, because they sell GPS units and Maps.
Well, there are ways around the requirement to be online.
You are going to have to have SOME sort of mapping software, obviously, if you are going to display image location on a map. Garmin mapping software, as you mentioned above, is one example you could use.
Using that example, what you would do is load your geocoding software's output files into Mapsource. Some output would be of a format that Mapsource could import directly; other output (such as shapefiles from something like Robogeo) would have to be converted to a Mapsource-friendly format by software like the very excellent DNR Garmin.
So, you can indeed display the spatial location of where your images were taken without being online. Unless you're online however, the average person isn't going to get the eye candy affect that Google Earth produces. Being a GIS guy, I have access to 5cm resolution orthophotos for pretty much most of the places I go with a camera, so I'm not worried about having access to Internet map servers. You won't find 5cm resolution on Google Earth...
Originally posted by Entropy Nothing is compatible with the Galileo system because it hasn't been deployed yet. There are only 2-3 birds up so far.
The US GPS system is just that - GLOBAL. It works anywhere. The reason other countries are looking into their own systems is not due to coverage, it is all about politics and control. (Europe doesn't want to rely on a navigation system controlled by the US military). The original impetus for Galileo was when the civilian GPS signal was intentionally degraded. Clinton did a good job torpedoing Galileo and setting it back for over a decade by signing an executive order to turn off selective availability (that intentional degradation) back in 2000.
I don't know if that was the impetus for Galileo - the Russians also have their own SV positioning system - GLONASS - and have had it available for use long before Galileo came into being. More to the point, the original four countries that started the Galileo program are all strong US allies - the US has bases in Germany, Italy, and Britain, and I doubt they forsee going to war with those countries anytime soon.
It's worth noting that Pres. George Bush recently signed an executive order permanently ending Selective Availability and none of the new Block IIF SV's will be capable of SA.
The impetus for Galileo, despite all the complex political arrangements for a multi country funding system, has continually and increasingly been that it is all about money. Location Based Services has become a huge component of the economy and it is rapidly growing every day. Galileo is (supposedly) going to be more accurate than GPS, and the intent is to have a "commercial" mode where users will get a much higher degree of accuracy - for a price of course.
Pragmatically, for the moment, unless you want to do your datalogging with an expensive professional GPS that can use both GLONASS and GPS signals, GPS is the only game in town and that is likely to remain the situation for some time to come.