Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
PocketGPS
Web
SatNav,GPS,Navigation
Pocket GPS World - SatNavs | GPS | Speed Cameras: Forums

Pocket GPS World :: View topic - Camera location accuracy in the database
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in for private messagesLog in for private messages   Log inLog in 

Camera location accuracy in the database

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> PocketGPSWorld Speed Camera Database
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SamHunter
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Posts: 17
Location: Glasgow, UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:19 am    Post subject: Camera location accuracy in the database Reply with quote

Probably a silly question, but is there a means of fixing the camera locations in the database.

The majority of camera locations I have submitted were taken with a handheld GPS receiver while I was standing beside the camera. The coordinates are accurate (or as accurate as I could get them Rolling Eyes Will these cameras start wandering about the road as people use POICapture?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lbendlin
Pocket GPS Staff
Pocket GPS Staff


Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59
Posts: 11878
Location: Massachusetts, USA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For each camera location we review all submissions and then select the one that is most likely (at the intersection, ant the Gatso pylon, etc). You can specify the recording method in the comment field, and that can help us to weigh submissions accordingly.

POICapture can only be as accurate as the point in time when the copilot presses the record button.
_________________
Lutz

Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SamHunter
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Posts: 17
Location: Glasgow, UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lbendlin wrote:
... select the one that is most likely (at the intersection, ant the Gatso pylon, etc). ...


Hmmm, it was my understanding that camera locations were "verified". I assumed this meant a visit by a real person to check not only the camera location, but its existance too. Selecting the one that is most likely from a number of submissions seems rather prone to error.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RobBrady
Frequent Visitor


Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 2718
Location: Chelmsford, UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SamHunter wrote:
Hmmm, it was my understanding that camera locations were "verified". I assumed this meant a visit by a real person to check not only the camera location, but its existance too. Selecting the one that is most likely from a number of submissions seems rather prone to error.


Hi Sam,

Yes, I do understand your point and the reasons you would think that, but...

1. The team, moderators and many trusted sources physically check as many as possible and we hope to extend this in the future.

2. We are fortunate that the volume of duplicated submissions is high, giving us the opportunity to check and double check positions.

This makes the database what is widely regarded as the best in the field.

Obviously, it will never be 100% - this is, of course, purely due to the ever changing nature of the camera geography.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SamHunter
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Posts: 17
Location: Glasgow, UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't get me wrong, I'm not having a dig at the database, or it's accuracy in general. Just seems that once a camera has been checked for existance and location, call it verified if you want, then all further positional updates are meaningless. The only update that means anything after that is if the camera has been removed.

That was really the basis of my question, seems a bit strange to me that a camera position that has been verified would be allowed to move to another location just because it looked more likely on a map 8O
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It wouldn't. Once a location is verified and confirmed its location is locked and will only be altered by an update notifying of its removal.
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
SamHunter
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Posts: 17
Location: Glasgow, UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren wrote:
It wouldn't. Once a location is verified and confirmed its location is locked and will only be altered by an update notifying of its removal.


Thanks, that's all I wanted to know :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message







Posted: Today    Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> PocketGPSWorld Speed Camera Database All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Make a Donation



CamerAlert Database

Click here for the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database

Download Speed Camera Database
22.053 (15 May 24)



WORLDWIDE SPEED CAMERA SPOTTERS WANTED!

Click here to submit camera positions to the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database


12mth Subscriber memberships awarded every week for verified new camera reports!

Submit Speed Camera Locations Now


CamerAlert Apps



iOS QR Code






Android QR Code







© Terms & Privacy


GPS Shopping