I love using Virtual Earth because the imagery is so great compared to Google’s (at least in the areas I’m interested in). The reason why is the UltraCamX imagery that Microsoft uses. LiveSide.net has a small window into the UltraCam and how impressive its results are.
10 responses so far ↓
1
Jud Aster
// Jan 2, 2008 at 4:43 am
The Google Earth images are far better in my area. I don’t think the reason is the Microsoft (purchased from Vexcel) camera. GE and VE display orthophoto (corrected) images. Most of the aerial images (the majority are satellite) are government donations, they own the orthophotos due to their mapping and cartographic projects.
The Microsoft Camera is not precisely the best of it’s class (geometrically). This market is leaded by the Intergraph DMC camera, then there are some other players like the Vexcel UltraCam, the Leica ADS40, and then others like DiMAC…
… the good news for GE and VE is that SONY is developing a new GigaPixel aerial camera:
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/invention/2007/09/wide-angled-gigapixel-satellite.html
Very bad news for the “>1 milion USD cameras”
2
Lefty
// Jan 2, 2008 at 6:40 am
I’m confused? UltraCamX is not better than satellite imagery? I look at my home town and VE is better than GE and I know they updated it with the UltraCam.
3
Jud Aster
// Jan 2, 2008 at 8:19 am
Lefty,
Yes, UltraCam images are better (for now) than satellite imagery of course, but the reason is not the camera… the pics are taken much closer to the ground, it’s that simple.
If I look to my town (Europe), GE images are far better, but I know that our government gave their best orthophotos to Google. Microsoft orthophotos are 5 or 6 years old here in my place.
4
James Fee
// Jan 2, 2008 at 8:56 am
Well that was what I was getting at. Aerial imagery will most always be better than Satellite. In the USA, MS seems to be better. Parts of Europe, MS is better. But if you pick a random part on the globe, Google will usually be much better.
5
MicahWilli
// Jan 2, 2008 at 9:13 am
The company that Google acquired last year, Image-America STL, was building a large format digital aerial camera that apparently had sic resolution capabilities. -that is from someone who lost their job in the acquisition. (not me, a friend) I expect Google to be flying their own aerial image flights soon. That is aside from having their own freakin satellites, via DigitalGlobe.
6
Jud Aster
// Jan 2, 2008 at 10:33 am
James, I’ve just compared a random part of the globe like:
Flagstaff (Arizona), and found that MS shows crappy greyscale images, courtesy of the USGS, while Google shows newer and colour satellite (DG) images.
Google started this fantastic race, and they are still way ahead MS. I believe they should work together with the mapping industry and governments, instead of being like Attila “the Hun” in the mapping market… just let the experts make their work.
7
Forrest
// Mar 6, 2008 at 3:47 pm
My firm just purchased the Ultra Cam. The reason MS imagery is better cause they are trying to fly it all themselves at a .5 ft pixel resolution. Most google earth imagery is 2 ft pixel or worse. The only reason some areas are not as good as Google Earth right now is because MS has not been able to fly it all yet, they are still acquiring the imagery.
8
yodel
// Mar 6, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Quite a few smaller midwest cities have been processed the last few months with more more southwest cities in the works, of course, because it’s winter. Not sure what the future list looks like but VE has some pretty darn sweet new features in the works that will make Google jealous
9
Tim Maddle
// Mar 8, 2008 at 8:46 am
yodel,
Do you work for Microsoft? Can you share any hints on the coming changes?
10
yodel
// Mar 11, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Tim,
Yep I’m a grunt! I’m not real sure what’s tippy top secret and what’s not so I’ll check with the home office before I get fired, errrr give up proprietary goodies first.
Leave a Comment