In this week's lab, we learned about the three types of map
projections that are used convert a 3D Earth to a 2D flat map. We also
learned how to utilize the Project and Project Raster tools when dealing
with re-projecting data in different map projections. We showed our
understanding of the lesson by creating three maps with different map
projection systems and how each map projection had different variations
with the four counties that were highlighted for this map.
When
calculating the areas of Alachua, Escambia, Miami-Dade, and Polk Counties in
each map projection, the square miles started to fluctuate in with different
numbers in each map projection. Albers map projection showed Alachua 970 sq.
miles, Escambia 672 sq. miles, Miami-Dade 1984 sq. miles and Polk 2011. UTM 16
N showed Alachua 974 sq. miles, Escambia 671 sq. miles, Miami-Dade 2003 sq.
miles, Polk 2023 sq. miles. State Plane N showed Alachua 969 sq. miles,
Escambia 672 sq. miles, Miami-Dade 1997 sq. miles, and Polk 2014 sq. miles. With
said fluctuation in square miles, only two numbers stayed the same in two
different projections which was Escambia County in projections Albers and State
Plane N. It would seem that Albers and State Plane N map projections are not
too far off from each with square miles area; however, the map projections need
to present the data as accurately as possible so one would need to decide which
map would help present their data better.
Each map projection has different things to offer in projecting different dataset, such
as, Albers is best for present the State of Florida, UTM 16 N is best for
presenting data in the panhandle region, and State Plane N is best for slightly
larger region around the panhandle of Florida.
Overall,
I enjoyed this week's lab quite a bit. I was enlighten even more about
the importance of what coordinate system should be used when
presenting certain types of data to viewers of the map.
No comments:
Post a Comment