Discussion: Time req'd to make new map?

To anyone who has been through the process of creating new O maps, how much time do you think it takes you on average to go start to finish?

Of course it depends on the size or the area and technical complexity, so I'm just looking for a broad sweeping generalization. For example, on average it takes you X number of hours to map an easy sprint area on average, and X number of hour for densely vegetated/technical maps?

I'm curious because I'm hoping that after I attend the mapping workshops at OUSA Convention this summer I can start mapping some new areas. Great info online about how to map, but haven't seen anything that gives a clue about how much time will be spent. I figure some of you mapping experts might have some general swags based on your own experience. Thanks for any inputs!

It takes me between 40 and 60 hours per square kilometer. I kept accurate records for the map I just finished, The Chattahoochee Bend map that will be used for the US Champs next year. The Chat Bend Map blog If you click on "Project time" you can get a link to a spreadsheet.

Sam

For a brand new map, that's probably pretty close to what I do as well. It really comes down to how good your base map is. I've done significant updates with only 10-20 hours work per Km^2 because the base was excellent and it was just adding and/or deleting things. If the base is not so good, so you're having to correct rather than just update, it's more like new mapping.

Also, I'm assuming we're talking terrain suitable for advanced level woods courses. Park maps often take much less time because you can get so much more information from the aerials. Probably the fastest map I ever made was of the Arch grounds in St. Louis. The Parks Service gave me their engineering map as a base. It had every tree, bench, water fountain, garden, etc. already mapped along with 1/2 foot contour intervals. I think I did the entire thing (1Km^2), field checking and cartography, in about 15 hours.

A rule of thumb for a traditional A-meet quality map in eastern terrain is at least 40 hours/sq km for fieldwork. I imagine some of the open stuff around Laramie goes much faster, and for the part of Surebridge that I worked on, I spent 111 hours/sq km.

Good sprint areas such as a campus with lots of detail can actually take longer per square km.

First step advice: It is worth spending more time and money on a better base map. The better the base map, the less time you'll have to spend in the field and on the computer.

Great info, thank you all. Sounds like I'll have some work cut out for me. =). The good news is that I know I can get an excellent base map for at least one of areas I would like to map, so I'm thinking I will start w/ that one first. I can see how the base map can make a world of difference.

Sam- I checked your site out, that is amazing stuff! What a project!! Thank you for the hundreds of hours for the sport, wow!

Now if I can just translate those ArcGIS skills into orienteering utility...this is getting exciting! Can't wait for the workshop!

First step advice: It is worth spending more time and money on a better base map.

Quoted for absolute truth. :)

Time and/or money spent before fieldworking will repay you in spades. On a recent ridiculously complex sprint map I did, I spent about 20 hours drawing the base from aerials before setting foot on the ground - and managed to get away with less than that doing fieldwork (and another 30 hours' drawing... *cries*)

I'm currently working my way through a bush map at a rate of 13 hours/km², thanks to some excellent photogrammetry.

My MTBO map has taken me a couple of years to get sorted but that's because I'm slack. It also erased itself once.

Fortunately in much of Western Australia the eucalyptus trees angle their leaves vertically when the photogrammetry fly-over is done so that they're not shielding the nice rocks under their canopy. They're co-operative like that.

Up or down?

I suspect horizontally - but because we're in the southern hemisphere they'd turn anti-clockwise to become edge on.

These are very experienced mappers giving you their advice on time estimates. Allow quite a bit more for your first map or two! Like any other complex project, things become a lot more efficient with experience. Pick a small area of 1 or 2 square Km for your first project so that you can do a complete and satisfying job in a finite amount of time without getting frustrated by it, and to give you a chance to go through the whole process. It is very hard when you are just starting mapping to achieve consistency in level of detail and uniformity of classification of trail sizes, running speed of woods, etc. By the end of your first draft, you well may be wanting to go back and re-do some of the parts you worked on first. If it is a small project, you will be much more likely to actually do that, and end up with a more satisfying map. And don't wait too long before starting the second map--repetition before you forget the lessons you learned the first time through will really help solidify the learning process.

Awesome pointers, thank you! That's what I'm thinking, possibly just doing a sprint course type of map for the first one, smaller size, and I cam get a great base map.

Yes, even a 1 km map can seem a little overwhelming for a first project. But areas half that size or less can still be good for a sprint and a first mapping experience.

Yeah, I'd love to do my first map over. I wince every time I see my name on the credits. Still, the club has got some use out of it and you have to start somewhere. Keep in mind that a good course setter can work around a pretty rough map. With proper disclaimers up front, people are generally pretty tolerant of a newbie map at local meets. Most of us are just happy to see someone putting out the effort.