GSV Car Sightings

[vdeane]

And many were done, at least for the newer imagery.  The newer stuff can always have the sign read, unless their automated face blurring gets the sign by accident.  The interval is shorter too; many times it feels like you're on top of the sign but have to increment 10 more times before getting to it.

It's a shame they can't be bothered to get the newer imagery out for much of the US.  Unless you're CA, NYC, or a major interstate in a big metro area, you don't have it, even if street view cars are driving through your area to get somewhere else.  The old imagery is so bad that it should be deleted immediately.

[deathtopumpkins]

It's a shame they can't be bothered to get the newer imagery out for much of the US.  Unless you're CA, NYC, or a major interstate in a big metro area, you don't have it, even if street view cars are driving through your area to get somewhere else.  The old imagery is so bad that it should be deleted immediately.

In doing research for my mapping projects I've found that actually many random places have gotten HD streetview imagery. Most city streets in most major cities have it, and not just the main roads. Plus lately many rural highways have gotten it. I've even found it on gravel FM roads out in rural Texas.

Also, virtually everywhere they've done the past few years has it, so this includes everything taken on the tricycle and on foot, along with almost all of Canada, as well as random areas they've revisited.

[Scott5114]

In some areas the resolution has been upgraded. It's just that the cars haven't been sent through many areas to update to the new resolution yet.

[vdeane]

It's a shame they can't be bothered to get the newer imagery out for much of the US.  Unless you're CA, NYC, or a major interstate in a big metro area, you don't have it, even if street view cars are driving through your area to get somewhere else.  The old imagery is so bad that it should be deleted immediately.

In doing research for my mapping projects I've found that actually many random places have gotten HD streetview imagery. Most city streets in most major cities have it, and not just the main roads. Plus lately many rural highways have gotten it. I've even found it on gravel FM roads out in rural Texas.

Also, virtually everywhere they've done the past few years has it, so this includes everything taken on the tricycle and on foot, along with almost all of Canada, as well as random areas they've revisited.

With the exception of some walkways Clarkson had the street view people go over, there is not a single location in NYSDOT region 7 with the HD imagery.  Stuff in western NY is limited to interstates and downtown areas.  It seems that they don't like upstate NY, because we seem to have less HD imagery than any other part of the country.

[deathtopumpkins]

It's a shame they can't be bothered to get the newer imagery out for much of the US.  Unless you're CA, NYC, or a major interstate in a big metro area, you don't have it, even if street view cars are driving through your area to get somewhere else.  The old imagery is so bad that it should be deleted immediately.

In doing research for my mapping projects I've found that actually many random places have gotten HD streetview imagery. Most city streets in most major cities have it, and not just the main roads. Plus lately many rural highways have gotten it. I've even found it on gravel FM roads out in rural Texas.

Also, virtually everywhere they've done the past few years has it, so this includes everything taken on the tricycle and on foot, along with almost all of Canada, as well as random areas they've revisited.

With the exception of some walkways Clarkson had the street view people go over, there is not a single location in NYSDOT region 7 with the HD imagery.  Stuff in western NY is limited to interstates and downtown areas.  It seems that they don't like upstate NY, because we seem to have less HD imagery than any other part of the country.

And how many people live in that part of NY? Not very many.

I know it may personally offend you that they are a company doing this to make money, but it makes much more business sense to give priority to dense urban areas with lots of people over sparsely populated rural areas, since I'm sure a far greater number of people are looking at streetview in a city than in a rural area.

Roadgeeks are different, but the majority of the population only really cares about streetviewing freeways and downtowns.

[vdeane]

We have no less than three cities up here, and even the suburbs further south don't have great imagery.  I find I use it in rural areas most often.  At least in urban areas you can count on signage to a certain degree, at least for street names (not so much route numbers).  In rural areas, signage for local roads can be sparse to non-existent.  I've also manged to get lost in Pittsburgh every time I drive there because their signage is so bad but street view doesn't have good imagery.  Quite frankly, I avoid downtowns.  Too busy and you have to pay to park everywhere.  Thus, having street view in downtowns does not help me.

[Scott5114]

Downtowns being busy being precisely why Google is serving them...