OSM vs City Navigator- Which is Less Cluttered?

Discussion in 'Mapping & Navigation' started by AdvRonski, Nov 26, 2012.

  1. AdvRonski

    AdvRonski They call me......Ronski

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Oddometer:
    729
    Location:
    Wishing I was back in Grand Junction, now in MN
    I'm running OSM map data in my Montana, and when I need to pick my way around a planned track that didn't go through, I have trouble seeing the roads/trails, with all the rivers and streams that are displayed.
    Here's an example-

    [​IMG]

    On a sunny day, I find it very difficult to distinguish between the two. Does City Navigator show every little stream and creek, but still have the 2-tracks and bigger trails displayed? I am happy with OSM otherwise, but if I want to see waterways, I'll use a TOPO.
    Any screenshots of CN out in the middle of Utah?
    #1
  2. guavadude

    guavadude de-composer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    918
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    I find that the CN maps shows much less detail although sometimes OSM is missing entire lakes that show up on CN.
    I think it's good to have both loaded and use the one with the info you need.
    Here's a screenshot of the CN map from the same area you posted.

    I don't have the topo maps but from what I've seen they are impossible to read.
    Still hoping to find "terrain" maps like google and mapquest OSM so you can see some contour without all the lines.

    Attached Files:

    #2
  3. mcnut

    mcnut Long timer

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Oddometer:
    1,391
    Location:
    Bakersfield CA & Sammamish WA
    My CN with the detail settings set to "Highest" shows many roads in that area at the same zoom level (2mi). Your BaseCamp looks rather different (Mac?) from my PC version.



    Bruce

    Attached Files:

    #3
  4. guavadude

    guavadude de-composer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    918
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Hmm, well you can see my detail slider in the screen shot is cranked.
    Would you mind posting a pic so me and the OP can see what it looks like.
    My OSM at the same zoom level as my CN pic looked just like his. I switched to my CN 2013.3 and that's what I got.

    I'm pretty new at this so pilot error is highly possible.
    #4
  5. mcnut

    mcnut Long timer

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Oddometer:
    1,391
    Location:
    Bakersfield CA & Sammamish WA
    I was editing my post when you replied.
    In the name of full discloser; My screen shot is from CN 2011.2 but I think it highly unlikely Garmin made any significant changes to these roads or the zoom level they display at. My Garmin CitySelect (maybe 10 years old) and Roads & Rec (like 15 years old) all show about the same road network.

    Bruce
    #5
  6. dlh62c

    dlh62c Long timer

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Oddometer:
    1,603
    #6
  7. AdvRonski

    AdvRonski They call me......Ronski

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Oddometer:
    729
    Location:
    Wishing I was back in Grand Junction, now in MN
    Thanks for the screenshots, guys! It appears that CN has comparable detail for the roads in that area, without all the clutter from every stream and ditch. I wonder if there is some way to render the OSM map data with just the main rivers and lakes, but it looks like the easy solution is to pony up the dough for CN.

    dlh62c- The point is that, with OSM, when you set the detail level to see the roads, you are stuck with all the waterways, too.
    #7
  8. Cataract2

    Cataract2 Where to?

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Oddometer:
    1,998
    Location:
    CO
    Man, you were able to figure out how to get OSM data on the Garmin? Hell, I would kill to get the OSM TOPO on my Garmin if nothing else. The instructions for it don't make much sense.
    #8
  9. guavadude

    guavadude de-composer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    918
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Can someone with the CN 2013 please take a screen shot of the same area near Grand Junction so I can tell if it's the map data changing from 2011 to 2013 or if it's a wrong setting. I've checked every parameter in Basecamp Mac and can't get the finer detail.
    thanks
    #9
  10. guavadude

    guavadude de-composer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    918
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    It looks like I do get the detail to show up in CN but I have to zoom to 1 mile and even then it doesn't look as good as the 2011 maps. The dirt roads are MUCH easier to see on the older map.

    Attached Files:

    #10
  11. guavadude

    guavadude de-composer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    918
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    I started a support ticket with Garmin. I'd prefer to have the resolution of the 2011 CN.
    Maybe it's a Mac vs PC thing but I doubt it. Should know soon.
    #11
  12. mcnut

    mcnut Long timer

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Oddometer:
    1,391
    Location:
    Bakersfield CA & Sammamish WA
    A little more info; the 2011.2 on PC retains the minor road detail out to 5 miles but on my Nuvi 500 only out to 0.8 miles. Also on the GPS all dirt roads (hollow dashed & hollow solid on the PC) are rendered as solid gray loosing that distinction.

    Bruce
    #12
  13. guavadude

    guavadude de-composer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Oddometer:
    918
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    ADVRonski
    I'm checking out some sweet topo maps I grabbed from http://www.gpsfiledepot.com/
    and using Basecamps Hide Map Features I'm able to hide rivers or intermittent streams and declutter the map.
    #13
  14. AdvRonski

    AdvRonski They call me......Ronski

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Oddometer:
    729
    Location:
    Wishing I was back in Grand Junction, now in MN
    Yes, I have many of those, too. Apparently, the PC version of Basecamp doesn't have the option to hide map features.
    And, where I want to hide the features in on the Montana.
    Maybe someday................
    #14
  15. dlh62c

    dlh62c Long timer

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Oddometer:
    1,603
    Keep in mind with OSM maps you do get what you pay for.

    daryl
    #15