Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master title style Future of DRAPP & Derivatives Presented by: Ashley Summers November 2018
Click to edit Master title style Agenda Click to edit Master title style • results from Future of DRAPP 2017 • defining DRAPP, related products/services, and derivatives • by product/service: successes, challenges, ideas, questions • open-ended needs assessment & suggestions for improvement • 2020 financial preparation • survey
Click to edit Master title style Results from Future of DRAPP 2017 Click to edit Master title style • the majority of respondents think that a streaming service of more current imagery would be a valuable addition to DRAPP, that DRCOG should pursue it, and that DRAPP specifications could be changed to fund it. • DRCOG paid for a 6-month Nearmap service (unlimited users and data) for partners to test drive. • around 80% of respondents think we could drop DAT and that they could do QC of their own areas. • we are in the process of doing our own DAT this year.
Click to edit Master title style Defining DRAPP, related items, and derivatives Click to edit Master title style • imagery • custom flights (e.g. Sanborn’s product) • streaming services (e.g. Nearmap’s service) • obliques • planimetrics • lidar • land use land cover …anything else?
Click to edit Master title style DRAPP successes Click to edit Master title style • continually get better data (tighter accuracy, higher resolution in a larger area) • continually capture a regional extent • maintain a partner base of ~50 entities • now offering historical imagery for public download • product supports derivates like planimetrics and land use land cover
Click to edit Master title style DRAPP successes Click to edit Master title style • early quotes and flexible billing so that financial logistics rarely get in our way • successfully making adjustments each year based on partner feedback COSTS 1000000 900000 800000 700000 600000 500000 Added 3-inch imagery and 400000 web map Dropped 300000 services quality control vendor 200000 100000 0 2012 2014 2016 2018
7 Click to edit Master title style DRAPP challenges Click to edit Master title style the combination of what we already offer plus what our competitors offer… faster turnaround more frequent customized orders ownership high accuracy …is creating a difficult set of requirements.
Click to edit Master title style DRAPP challenges Click to edit Master title style • needs may be diverging between departments, by use case • cost will only go up if we keep adding products and services • cannot go faster with traditional methods Accuracy Speed
Click to edit Master title style DRAPP ideas Click to edit Master title style goal create a one-stop shop program with a base product(s) and then buy-ups of other products so all (or mostly all) needs are met. considerations • More offerings might keep partners from buying from multiple sources. • More offerings might bring more partners to the consortium. • More offerings might diversify our limited funding so our resources cannot be pooled as efficiently as before.
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style • When do you need high accuracy? What are your • When do you need high resolution? imagery use • When do you need high frequency? cases? • When do you need obliques? And in what format? • Do we need to adjust the extent of certain resolutions?
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style • Many organizations What would it take to have multiple source of imagery and consolidate your derivatives (DRCOG, organization’s imagery + Pictometry, Nearmap). derivative purchases • Different departments often have different with DRCOG? needs and funding sources.
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style What do you need to Existing materials that explain the project and make the case for deliverables: participation? • Emails from me • Presentations on the website • Handouts To communicate to your • DRAPP Project colleagues in other Summary • Resolution departments? Comparisons
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style If the minimum buy-in for DRAPP was EITHER custom flights or streaming, what would you choose: What should the 1. Custom Flight Only (e.g. minimum buy-in traditional DRAPP product) be for DRAPP? 2. Streaming Only (e.g. Nearmap service) 3. Custom Flight + Streaming
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style DRCOG currently offers an interim Would a Nearmap WMTS and a final WMS of the current imagery from the custom service change our flights. Many partners create their own need for a services from the custom flight imagery instead of using the WMS DRAPP(custom offerings flight) WMS? The Nearmap service is updated 2- 3 times a year with new imagery.
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style DRCOG currently offers historical Would an OIT WMS services. service change our need for a Historical DRAPP(custom flight) WMS?
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style • Currently have a 6-month trial with unlimited users and data that ends on 12/25. What should we • DRCOG funded the trial but future subscriptions must be do about Nearmap funded by partners. in 2019? • We’ve been using about 8GB/month with 56 users. • For 2020, I will include a Nearmap buy-up option in your quote.
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style • Considering a plan with limited data, unlimited users What should we • Potential for oblique buy-ups do about Nearmap • Currently struggling with how in 2020? to incorporate existing users into a group plan
Click to edit Master title style Imagery discussion question Click to edit Master title style • What is the use case? • In a recent survey, most said they didn’t have an existing Does your use case for obliques. organization need • What format do you need them in? obliques? • In a recent survey, most said they would want a service.
Click to edit Master title style Planimetric successes Click to edit Master title style • completed two successful projects – 2014, 2016 • maintaining or increasing extents of foundational data with each project and offering new buy-ups • utilization in the public, private, and academic sectors and contribtuions to OpenStreetMap • better deal and better product than other methods (Digital Globe, Microsoft) • value add contracts – on the way to a more sustainable funding model
Click to edit Master title style Planimetric challenges Click to edit Master title style • lag time on data (2018 data isn’t complete until early 2020) • hard to keep the project at a regional extent • hard to reach all potential users/funders with current marketing campaigns
Click to edit Master title style Planimetric ideas Click to edit Master title style • continue to pursue Partners fund open partnerships with private data sector that add value to data as a “premium” benefit for funders Added value is Open data is shared back only to consumed by funding partners everyone • match extents for most features Some users add more value
Click to edit Master title style Planimetric discussion question Click to edit Master title style currently… Which features • building footprints, edge of become more pavement, parking, ramps, trails, and sidewalks are valuable at a considered “regional” regional extent? • driveways, impervious surface, poles/signs, and pavement markings are considered “local”
Click to edit Master title style Planimetric discussion question Click to edit Master title style • There are other data sources How well does our available that use different methods (Digtal Globe, capture criteria Microsoft, Ecopia Tech) meet our need? • Would we be satisfied with lower grade if it was cheaper or delivered faster?
Click to edit Master title style LIDAR successes and challenges Click to edit Master title style successes partnership with FEMA and USGS in 2013 leveraged our limited funds to cover most of the metro area. LAS files and 1 foot contours seem to be highly desirable based on downloads challenges LIDAR data is expensive and not collected routinely
Click to edit Master title style LIDAR ideas Click to edit Master title style utilize available funding sources • apply for a BAA award through USGS engage private sector • find private sector partners to contribute funding and/or value-adds
Click to edit Master title style LIDAR discussion question Click to edit Master title style • Is the USGS QL2 spec sufficient? What are your • Are 1 foot contours necessary? LIDAR use • What extent should we cases? capture? • Where did we miss collecting data in 2013?
Recommend
More recommend
