What free tools, on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF maps?

[Arlen Holder]

The question is what free tools, on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF maps?
(Preferably a cross-platform tool.)

I'm writing a cross-platform apnote for iOS & Android users showing them
how to locate/track/route on historical geoPDFs which are geocalibrated by
the USGS.

I'd like to add a section to that apnote for Linux and/or Windows users to
perform their own geocalibration of their own "assemblage" of their own
downloads of the historical USGS geoPDF quadrangles.

My idea is that the user can download, say, 4 adjacent historical USGS
quadrangles onto Linux and/or Windows, which they can then crop the borders
of to "stitch" together to create a larger USGS historical geoPDF, which
then can be loaded into the free iOS and Android mapping apps.

This allows them to "walk" the path of their ancestors, as these historical
free accurate geoPDFs date back every three years well into the 1800s.

I've done the task using OziExplorer, but it's far too complex to describe
the process for a general user, and, besides, it doesn't work on Linux.

The question is what free tools, on Windows & Linux, geocalibrate PDF maps?

Googling, I can easily find plenty of free tools which seem to geocalibrate
PDF maps (and other formats), but I wish to confirm first which single free
tool to suggest to users where I don't have a lot of experience, but you
might.

Here's what a search unearthed, for example:
1. Quantum GIS (QGIS) freeware
<http://www.qgistutorials.com/en/docs/georeferencing_basics.html>
2. OziExplorer shareware/trialware
<http://www.oziexplorer3.com/support/oziexplorer/other/linux.html>
3. GDAL open-source libraries
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDAL>
4. MAPC2MAPC freeware
<http://www.the-thorns.org.uk/mapping/>
5. OOM freeware
<http://www.openorienteering.org/>

If you have experience with georeferencing PDF maps, which tool do you
suggest are both powerful enough, compatible enough, and easy enough to use
to be the one free tool to suggest in that apnote?

[R.Wieser]

Arlen,

> The question is what free tools, on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF
> maps?

You already have found a few. Whats wrong with them ?

And do you *really* need to limit yourself that much when you have
*absolutily nothing* to work with yet ?

Focus yourself on one platform, and try to figure out how to do what you
want there (what needs to be done, and which tools you need for it).

After you've succeeded there, you can try to find equivalent tools for the
other OS, and with the experience of having already written an appnote for
one OS, you write a similar one for the other.

Or, in a simple word K.I.S.S. Do not create a "white elephant" request
when two smaller, normal elephants will suffice as well.

> If you have experience with georeferencing PDF maps,

I don't have any ...

> which tool do you suggest are both powerful enough, compatible
> enough, and easy enough to use to be the one free tool to suggest
> in that apnote?

... but I do have experience with trying to bite off more than I could chew.
And yes, I choked on it most every time (never got a working result). Not
a fun feeling, as you can probably agree with.

tl;dr:
Your problems (as the above and the ones you have posted in the past) are
not really all that difficult, but you always find requirements to make it
complex. Don't. Take it easy, and you will have a much better chance to
reach a (partial) goal.

Also, do a google for "stitching geoPDFs" (without the quotes). You're not
the first one who came up with the idea. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[Arlen Holder]

On 14 Jul 2018 07:12:45 GMT, R.Wieser wrote:

>> The question is what free tools, on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF
>> maps?
>
> You already have found a few. Whats wrong with them ?

If you've never dived in a cave, you won't know what to expect.
If you've dived just once in a cave, you have a billion questions.

Hence, I think I wasn't clear in the OP that I'm seeking only answers from
people who have actually done it since I'm like that cave diver who has
done it once so he knows enough to ask advice of the experts.

This is like cave diving - where going down the wrong path is expensive.

I'm simply asking for an expert to tell me which are the dead ends and
which are the right directions to go for smooth swimming.

Also, it seems, from your post, that you may have never georeferenced a
file, so you perhaps may not yet realize how freaking complicated it is, at
least with OziExplorer.

I can handle complex tools, but the arcane steps using OziExplorer are just
out of the question for the average user.

The apnote has to be for the general user - and it's best to be cross
platform for the most bang for the buck.

If you ask why not just try the others, then it's kind of clear that you
likely have no idea how difficult that task is.

That is why I'm asking for experts' advice which software to sink my energy
into since I already spent umpteen hours on OziExplorer only to find it's
process just too freaking complex to put in a simple apnote.

BTW, if you asked me for which map software was best, I could tell you.
But I have spent umpteen hours making those tests, as shown here:
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_android_maps_01.jpg>

I just want to find someone who knows more than I do, to help guide me.

> And do you *really* need to limit yourself that much when you have
> *absolutily nothing* to work with yet ?

Limit?
I don't understand.
a. Freeware gives the most bang for the buck because EVERYONE can use it.
b. Linux/Windows portability also gives the most bang for the buck.
c. USGS topos are the *only* solution (OSM sucks like you can't imagine)

The only "limit" is that the solution is only useful for the US, but, if
you knew what I know about the piss-poor quality of OSM topo maps, you'd
know why I won't bother with OSM-based solutions. (Note: I love free stuff,
so I love the "idea" of free OSM topo maps - but once you've used a free
USGS topo maps, you'll never want to touch OSM topo maps ever again.)

Nobody is going to buy the software if they're a novice, and it's a lot
harder for me to learn and document two different software products than
one that is cross platform for both Linux & Windows.

And if it's cross platform, then one tutorial helps both Linux/Win users.

So, the one thing I'm doing is NOT limiting the benefits.

> Focus yourself on one platform, and try to figure out how to do what you
> want there (what needs to be done, and which tools you need for it).

I appreciate the advice, but it seems I didn't describe the problem set
well enough yet.

I already used OziExplorer on Windows.
And I already wrote the tutorial.

Suffice to say that it's just far too complex.
As just one hint, everything has to be in PLT format.

You have no idea how much time was wasted trying to get that process to
work. I got it to work - but it was just miserable. OziExplorer is out of
the question for the general user.

Now it's time to try something else, but why go down the wrong path if an
expert can guide me on the right path?

> After you've succeeded there, you can try to find equivalent tools for the
> other OS, and with the experience of having already written an appnote for
> one OS, you write a similar one for the other.

Um, that's good advice, Rudy.
In fact, I *already* did that.
a. I already wrote the tutorial (long ago).
b. It's far too freaking complex.
c. So I'm seeking a *better* way.

But I don't want to go down the wrong tunnel again.
I just want an expert, who has done it more than I have, to point in the
right direction.

If anyone here has never georeferenced a file, then there is zero chance
they can guide me.

That's OK. I don't expect experts on this group for this task - but it's
still worth asking because one guy who has done it a lot can save me
infinite amounts of wrong turns.

In turn, when I write the apnote, that saves others infinite amounts of
wrong turns.

That's how this works.

> Or, in a simple word K.I.S.S. Do not create a "white elephant" request
> when two smaller, normal elephants will suffice as well.

I don't understand that statement.
If you want, I'll point you to the apnote I wrote long ago, but trust me,
it's freaking complicated. Needlessly. OziExplorer is just too complex.

All I'm asking is for an experienced person to guide me, where actually, I
*expect* QGIS to be the answer (which is what I'll test if nothing else
better comes up), but that's why I'm asking first.

It's normal to ask such things when you have experience to know that
choosing the wrong tool is a nightmare (as it was with OziExplorer).

>> If you have experience with georeferencing PDF maps,
>
> I don't have any ...

Ah, I figured that already. :)
Then you can't help since your advice I already know.

This isn't my first rodeo with complicated software.
There's nothing you can teach me if you haven't already done it.

If this thread has zero replies, that's fine.
I'll solve the problem no matter what.

It just would be nice to have guidance from an expert, that's all.
(Chitchat won't help.)

> ... but I do have experience with trying to bite off more than I could chew.
> And yes, I choked on it most every time (never got a working result). Not
> a fun feeling, as you can probably agree with.

I can't remember, in decades of working with software, a single time I've
failed at a task I've set out to do. I'm sure it has happened, but I don't
generally fail and I won't fail here.

I just don't want to go down too many wrong tunnels (like OziExplorer was).

Again, I expect QGIS to be the only valid answer - but I don't know that
(I'm just guessing that from reading up on the products). But who knows,
there could be a better simpler more generic sequence out there.

> tl;dr:

Anyone who ever says "tl;dr" will *never* be able to help me, because I
don't ask easy-to-answer questions (and I do my research first).

It's OK if nobody knows the answer. I don't expect more than one person in
this entire audience to know more than I do - but I'm hoping to find that
one person.

Again - if you've never done the task - there is zero chance you can help.

> Your problems (as the above and the ones you have posted in the past) are
> not really all that difficult, but you always find requirements to make it
> complex. Don't. Take it easy, and you will have a much better chance to
> reach a (partial) goal.

This is the same sentiment you expressed above where I didn't understand
you.

I realize, Rudy, you're trying to be purposefully helpful, which I
appreciate, so I do believe that you're serious when you say that, but I
already mentioned that I'm making it as easy as possible by asking for:
a. A cross platform solution (most bang for the buck), and,
b. Freeware (again, most bang for the buck)

I have decades of experience testing and organizing software.

Just as one simple example, I set up a new Android phone, and *this* is my
basic organization of just the mapping software alone.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_android_maps_01.jpg>

> Also, do a google for "stitching geoPDFs" (without the quotes). You're not
> the first one who came up with the idea. :-)

I realize you put a smiley there, and I realize that you're actually trying
to be purposefully helpful, but I don't know if you realize how much
experience I already have with "stitching geoPDFs".

It's a classic Wolf K move to post "google it", when you need to realize:
a. I already googled it extensively (and posted proof in the OP), and,
b. I already have done it (and found the process amazingly complicated).
c. And I know too much about OSM to not know that USGS rocks by comparison.

Hence, the purpose of this thread is simply to find the one person on this
newsgroup who has done it more than I have (where I've only done it a half
dozen times using OziExplorer - where I concluded that OziExplorer is
horrid).

If this thread has no posts from someone who knows more than I do, then
that's fine ... but the hope is to find someone who does know more than I
do, who can guide me (I'm expecting QGIS to be the answer - but maybe it's
not).

I'm hoping there's one person who has done it before, who can offer advice.
If this thread has 0 responses from people who haven't done it, that's OK.

If nobody has any helpful experience, I'm gonna try QGIS next on my own.
But I don't want to go into another complex cave system if I don't have to.

I just want to find someone who knows more than I do, to help guide me.

[William Unruh]

On 2018-07-14, Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 14 Jul 2018 07:12:45 GMT, R.Wieser wrote:
>
>>> The question is what free tools, on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF
>>> maps?
>>
>> You already have found a few. Whats wrong with them ?
>
> If you've never dived in a cave, you won't know what to expect.
> If you've dived just once in a cave, you have a billion questions.

And prolix response which never answers the questions, removed.
...

>
> That is why I'm asking for experts' advice which software to sink my energy
> into since I already spent umpteen hours on OziExplorer only to find it's
> process just too freaking complex to put in a simple apnote.

Below you talk about software that the user is supposed to buy. So why do you
not make a wrapper which does all that "freaking complex" stuff?

>
> BTW, if you asked me for which map software was best, I could tell you.
> But I have spent umpteen hours making those tests, as shown here:
> <http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_android_maps_01.jpg>
>
> I just want to find someone who knows more than I do, to help guide me.

But then they would be the ones who should be doing what you want to do, not
you.

>
>> And do you *really* need to limit yourself that much when you have
>> *absolutily nothing* to work with yet ?
>
> Limit?
> I don't understand.
> a. Freeware gives the most bang for the buck because EVERYONE can use it.
> b. Linux/Windows portability also gives the most bang for the buck.
> c. USGS topos are the *only* solution (OSM sucks like you can't imagine)

Limit yourself to one software system.

...

>
> Nobody is going to buy the software if they're a novice, and it's a lot
> harder for me to learn and document two different software products than
> one that is cross platform for both Linux & Windows.

Buy what? If they are interesting in doing the mapping, sure they will buy it
instead of trying to follow directions from another novice who knows very
little.

>
> And if it's cross platform, then one tutorial helps both Linux/Win users.

So write two of them.

>
> So, the one thing I'm doing is NOT limiting the benefits.
>
>> Focus yourself on one platform, and try to figure out how to do what you
>> want there (what needs to be done, and which tools you need for it).
>
> I appreciate the advice, but it seems I didn't describe the problem set
> well enough yet.
>
> I already used OziExplorer on Windows.
> And I already wrote the tutorial.

Good. Apparently it was not that complex.

>
> Suffice to say that it's just far too complex.
> As just one hint, everything has to be in PLT format.
>
> You have no idea how much time was wasted trying to get that process to
> work. I got it to work - but it was just miserable. OziExplorer is out of
> the question for the general user.
>
> Now it's time to try something else, but why go down the wrong path if an
> expert can guide me on the right path?

Because the expert should then be the guide not some novice who has no real
idea how to do caving.

>
>> After you've succeeded there, you can try to find equivalent tools for the
>> other OS, and with the experience of having already written an appnote for
>> one OS, you write a similar one for the other.
>
> Um, that's good advice, Rudy.
> In fact, I *already* did that.
> a. I already wrote the tutorial (long ago).
> b. It's far too freaking complex.
> c. So I'm seeking a *better* way.
>
> But I don't want to go down the wrong tunnel again.
> I just want an expert, who has done it more than I have, to point in the
> right direction.
>


>

>> Or, in a simple word K.I.S.S. Do not create a "white elephant" request
>> when two smaller, normal elephants will suffice as well.
>
> I don't understand that statement.

Keep it simple, stupid.

Instead of doing both windoes and Linux in one big white elephant, just do
them separately. Use stuff on Linux and write up for Linux separately from
Windows.

> If you want, I'll point you to the apnote I wrote long ago, but trust me,
> it's freaking complicated. Needlessly. OziExplorer is just too complex.

You keep saying that.

>
> All I'm asking is for an experienced person to guide me, where actually, I
> *expect* QGIS to be the answer (which is what I'll test if nothing else
> better comes up), but that's why I'm asking first.
>
> It's normal to ask such things when you have experience to know that
> choosing the wrong tool is a nightmare (as it was with OziExplorer).
>
>>> If you have experience with georeferencing PDF maps,
>>
>> I don't have any ...
>
> Ah, I figured that already. :)
> Then you can't help since your advice I already know.

No, you have not taken in his advice at all.

>
> This isn't my first rodeo with complicated software.
> There's nothing you can teach me if you haven't already done it.

Apparently there is something he can teach you, but to teach one needs a
receptive learner, which he does not have.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to the following from William Unruh:

Hi William Unruh,

When I author a thread, I respond to all valid queries in that thread.

I don't leave anyone hanging (unless they've proven themselves unfit for a
response). Both you and Rudy are generally purposefully helpful, so I will
respond accordingly, with the same helpful tone and intent.

> And prolix response which never answers the questions, removed.

I am new to the word "prolix", so thanks for the new word!

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prolix
1: unduly prolonged or drawn out : too long
2: marked by or using an excess of words
from pro- forward + liquºre to be fluid

> Below you talk about software that the user is supposed to buy.

I wonder where you got that idea from?

I assume I probably wasn't clear in that I've only bought mobile device
software a single time in my life, and that was just to write the apnote on
how to buy iOS & Android software using anonymous methods (for privacy
reasons). [I ended up wasting the rest of the money on that card because
the software cost less than the minimum amount I had to put on the card.]

Other than TurboTax, I haven't bought Windows software in, oh, maybe 5 to
10 years. And I have never needed to purchase Linux software ever.

All my tutorials exclusively use freeware, and all are cross platform on
purpose (if possible).

If you saw payware in any of my links, then one of us goofed because all my
tutorials utilize freeware for good reasons of leverage.

You have to remember, the "job" I'm trying to get done isn't what you think
it is. The job is to write the tutorial so that EVERYONE can get the job
done.

If the job was just for me to get the job done, I *already* did it.

The job isn't for me to get the job done, but to teach everyone else how
they can get the job done. Those people are on iOS, Android, Linux, and
Windows.

You have to realize I'm always trying to help people do what I can do.

> So why do you
> not make a wrapper which does all that "freaking complex" stuff?

Hehhehheh... I'm prolix; you're succinct.
You can write wrappers. I can't.

I write tutorials; you write wrappers.
Both benefit the tribal knowledge in different ways.

>> I just want to find someone who knows more than I do, to help guide me.
>
> But then they would be the ones who should be doing what you want to do, not
> you.

I must confess that sentence makes no sense.

I'm an advanced scuba diver. If I was going to dive in an area that I
wasn't familiar with, I have no qualms about asking for advice from people
who have dived there before.

If you don't understand that concept, then I can't teach it to you
(because it's as basic a concept as they get).

> Limit yourself to one software system.

What you don't know, or didn't get from the original post, is that the
entire tutorial is designed to be cross platform, like most of my tutorials
are designed to be.

So the software chosen on the mobile devices is free cross platform
software, as "should be" the software chosen for the desktop.

There are excellent reasons for that choice, where the *only* time you
break that rule is when one platform clearly excels over the other.

The minute you limit yourself to a single platform, you lose a huge
percentage of the people who would benefit from the tutorial.

Remember, the goal is the tutorial ... the goal isn't to get the job done
(I already did it ... but the way I did it is too complicated for the
tutorial for others to follow).

> Buy what? If they are interesting in doing the mapping, sure they will buy it
> instead of trying to follow directions from another novice who knows very
> little.

This is your philosophy. Mine is different.
Neither is right. Neither is wrong.

My philosophy is to write thousands of apnotes to help people "do things"
(I likely have ten thousand to my credit, but I don't want to hazard a
guess as the number is huge and not only in Usenet, so it doesn't matter
how many zeros there are).

The goal is so that users can benefit from following those apnotes.
And, another goal is that 1 out of 1,000 users *improves* the anpotes.

Everone wins because we all stand on someone's shoulders.

My philosophy is also that almost everything you need to do, is already
available in freeware (I've been a freeware junkie since the early days of
computers - where I almost never fail to find freeware to do the job).

My philosophy is that a cross platform solution has more leverage than a
single-platform solution, where I've already written the tutorial for the
cross-platform *use* of the geocalibrated maps on iOS and Android ... and
where I've written a single-platform horridly complex *geocalibration* of
the PDFs on Windows ...

Hence, the only thing this thread asks is:
What free tools on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF maps?

You seem to be displaying a dislike for the question, which is odd, since
it's a very simple question indeed.

>> And if it's cross platform, then one tutorial helps both Linux/Win users.
>
> So write two of them.

I don't know how to respond to that other than to say that if you don't see
the value of a cross-platform solution when leverage is your goal, then
you'll never see the value of anything (since the value is obvious).

> Good. Apparently it was not that complex.

Hehhehheh ... I like the sarcasm.
However, if you haven't done it, then there is 0 chance you can answer the
question.

I'm hoping there is 1 person out there who knows more than I do who can
help advise where the pitfalls are in my next choice of QGIS (since the
OziExplorer method is too complicated for most people).

> Because the expert should then be the guide not some novice who has no real
> idea how to do caving.

You are making a lot of mistakes which I can't disabuse you of since this
is the third obvious thing that you whoosehed on. I don't have the skills
to teach you the obvious, so, I'll just accept your point, which is that
you haven't done the task at hand.

Anyone who hasn't actualy done it, can't possibly answer the question
posed. All they can do is chitchat endlessly about their objections to
anyone trying to write a general solution for users.

If it was easy, everyone would have done it already since it's obviously an
extremely useful skill for people who route in the backcountry like I do
daily.

>>> Or, in a simple word K.I.S.S. Do not create a "white elephant" request
>>> when two smaller, normal elephants will suffice as well.
>>
>> I don't understand that statement.
>
> Keep it simple, stupid.

You have a wholly different philosophy than I do.

You apparently think two tutorials are better than one when both do the
same thing. I don't.

Remember, I already wrote the cross platform iOS/Android tutorial for
*using* the maps; I just need to write the cross-platform tutorial for
*creating* the maps.

> Instead of doing both windoes and Linux in one big white elephant, just do
> them separately. Use stuff on Linux and write up for Linux separately from
> Windows.

Philosophically, that's like taking two different cars when the family goes
on a trip to Disneyland. One for the wife and girls, and another for the
husband and boys.

If you think that's efficient, then I can't possibly disabuse you of your
notions. Suffice to say I think your approach is inefficient.

> You keep saying that.

Having said that, I know that it takes more intelligence and knowledge to
make cross-platform solutions, but I've been solving cross platform
problems my whole life.

It's as if you want to have one text file for Linux, and another text file
of the same thing for Windows, simply becuase they do the line feeds and
carriage returns differently.

If you really think having two files that do the same thing is more
efficient than having one that takes into account the variations, then I
can never disabuse you of your thoughts.

I think having a Word file on Linux and having that same file read on
Windows, is a good thing. You apparently think you should have two files,
one for Linux and one for Windows.

Sure, your method is brain dead and hence it's KISS.
But it's just stupid what you suggest.

It takes brains to create cross-platform solutions.

> No, you have not taken in his advice at all.

You've got to be kidding.
Both of you suggest the antithesis of what I'm trying to accomplish.
At the same time, neither of you have ever done the task even once.

When I decide to continue on the approach with the most leverage, you
lambaste me for not taking the "advice" to "just give up" from the both of
you?

Really?
C'mon. Did you purchase too many arguments this week or what?

I appreciate the helpful intent, really, I do - but - I'll say it again
that there is zero chance you can answer the question if you know less than
I do about the stated problem set.

> Apparently there is something he can teach you, but to teach one needs a
> receptive learner, which he does not have.

Don't worry. It's not your fault. You're trying to help.
Both of you think you're offering "advice", which I appreciate, but...

The question is a specific technical question of which way to go in a
complex cave system, where ...

If you've never scuba dived, and if you've never even been in a cave once
in your life, then you can't possibly give an expert scuba diver advice on
which way to go in a cave that he's only dived in once himself.

If you haven't done this task, you can't possibly answer the question.

[R.Wieser]

Arlen,

> If you've never dived in a cave, you won't know what to expect.
> If you've dived just once in a cave, you have a billion questions.

No, you wouldn't. Anyone exiting from a cave dive will have learned how
to dive *way* before doing this one, and have made the right decisions. All
the others have become floaters, and can get their Darwin award from st
peters desk (if you have been send down you have to ask for it. They're not
as nice over there)

> I'm simply asking for an expert to tell me which are the dead
> ends and which are the right directions to go for smooth
> swimming.

You're not asking for experts, you're just asking for someone with more
experience than you.

You already know what you want. All you need to do is to read the reviews
about the different programs offering it, and pick the one who you think you
like best. And you've already show that you are able to find those
programs yourself.

So what do you need those "experts" for ? To take you by the hand and
lead you thru your "cave dive" ?

> Also, it seems, from your post, that you may have never georeferenced
> a file,

And neither have you, as you directly folow that up with:

> at least with OziExplorer.

Maybe your choice of program made it all that complicated ?

> If you ask why not just try the others, then it's kind of clear
> that you likely have no idea how difficult that task is.

Wel, its easy: I ask others to figure all the problems out, and than hand me
the results. Just like you ... Easy-peasy. :-D :-(

> I just want to find someone who knows more than I do, to help guide me.

Guide you with *what* ? Maybe if you ask specific questions (about
specific problems) you could get some responses telling you how to
solve/evade them. Currently you just have a "help me!" balloon up, with
no specifics other than some vague references to geoPDFs and combining them.
Heck, even your preferred format has only come up in this message.

> Limit?
> I don't understand.

It must work on both Linux *and* Windows ? That means you are ignoring a
likely large group with solutions for Windows *or* Linux, and which could
possibly contain the simple stitching you're after.

> and it's a lot harder for me to learn and document two different
> software products

Strange. In my experience a second similar program is most always easier
to master, because of everything you learned from the first.

> I appreciate the advice, but it seems I didn't describe the problem
> set well enough yet.

:-) Thats a novel way to say "not at all" if I ever saw one.

> Now it's time to try something else, but why go down the wrong
> path if an expert can guide me on the right path?

There is no such path, seeing how you want to have stuff done in your
specific way.

And again, you do not need an expert, you need someone with experience.
Someone who knows *all* (or at least most of) those geoPDF stitching
programs, and tell you which one to use. And thats a rather tall order to
fill I'm afraid, and why your question (as posted) will most likely fail.

> Um, that's good advice, Rudy.
> In fact, I *already* did that.

You misunderstood. Drop all of that "OziExplorer" stuff (as its, as you have
ben telling me, too complex), than find yourself the easiest-to-handle
program for either Windows OR Linux. Learn it and write a tutorial for it.
After that find yourself similar program for the other OS and, whith all
that you already have learned from the first, "breeze" thru the second and
write a similar tutorial for that version.

> But I don't want to go down the wrong tunnel again.

As I already mentioned, put some energy into googeling, penning down how
what you found does not match your requirements and what you expect it to do
instead. Post that. That way you show that you really did your howmework
as well as giving the readers a fair chance to answer a question (as they
are specific, instead of a vague "give me what I want" one).

> If anyone here has never georeferenced a file, then there is zero
> chance they can guide me.

Lol.

With the right program I do not even need to know *anything* about it, as it
will just take two (or more) geoPDFs, stitch them together, and create a new
geoPDF for me ...

... which I than feed into a viewer.

And that (stiching together) is what you asked about. No more, no less.

Or have you some more requirements ready to spring upon us ? <whistle>

> but it's still worth asking because one guy who has done it a lot can
> save me infinite amounts of wrong turns.

You're still expecting someone to take you by the hand and tell you
*everything*.

Its not likely that that is going to happen, because a) you are expected to
put some work into it yourself, and learning how a program works is part of
it, b) most noone wants to be used as a walking-and-talking "how to use"
booklet/help file/webpage that accompanies most programs c) be used as a
replacement for google d) does not want to be sucked into your tutorial
building.

And that, in a nutshell, is probably why you, after a while, get the cold
sholder of most of the repliers to your questions.

>> Or, in a simple word K.I.S.S. Do not create a "white elephant"
>> request when two smaller, normal elephants will suffice as well.
>
> I don't understand that statement.

Your request is for a sulution that *must* work on both platforms (the
"white elephant" - as in: not commonly occuring), even though in the niche
you are working in already strongly limits the ammount of solutions. I
suggested to look for seperate solution for each platform (the two "smaller,
normal elephants"), which is most likely much easier to find.

>>> If you have experience with georeferencing PDF maps,
>>
>> I don't have any ...
>
> Ah, I figured that already. :)
> Then you can't help since your advice I already know.

You do ? Than tell me, whats wrong with it ? You obviously do not
think much of it ....

And I don't think you are really aware of what I'm trying to do here. Yes,
its to help you. But the question is, with what ? :-)

> This isn't my first rodeo with complicated software.

Maybe you've chosen the wrong software, or are trying to use it in a way it
was never ment for. Or maybe its only ment to be used by the experts you so
frequently mention ?

> There's nothing you can teach me if you haven't already done it.

:-) I do not have any knowledge in this regard with which to hold your hand
with if thats what you mean. For the rest ? I beg to differ.

> I can't remember, in decades of working with software, a single time
> I've failed at a task I've set out to do.

Well, just last week or so you failed completing your powerful "phone Susan"
& "vipw" commands ... <eyebrow raised>

> Anyone who ever says "tl;dr" will *never* be able to help me,
> because I don't ask easy-to-answer questions (and I do my
> research first).

If you ask either very broad, unspecified questions or ones with rather
specific requirements than you seldom get answers, thats true. But thats a
problem with how you put your questions forward, not how complex the problem
behind it is I'm afraid.

> I don't expect more than one person in this entire audience to
> know more than I do

:-) Most people here know more than you do. Just not the things than that
you are interrested in.

And than there is the problem that some of those people might not want to
respond to you, because of what you ask of them (everyhing / holding your
hand).

But I do hope you find someone with *experience* with multiple geoPDF
stitching programs, and knows which one is easiest to use.

>>Don't. Take it easy, and you will have a much better chance to
>> reach a (partial) goal.
>
> This is the same sentiment you expressed above where I didn't
> understand you.

I hope I cleared that up.

>> Also, do a google for "stitching geoPDFs" (without the quotes).
>>You're not the first one who came up with the idea. :-)
>
> I realize you put a smiley there, and I realize that you're actually
> trying to be purposefully helpful, but I don't know if you realize
> how much experience I already have with "stitching geoPDFs".

Its not about what you *do* already know, its about what you *don't*.
Those people talking about the same problem might give you an insight (or
two), helping you to shift your POV and by it solve your problem.

> It's a classic Wolf K move to post "google it"

Don't do that. Don't say I'm trying to be purposefully helpfull, and than
mention I'm the same as someone you AFAICR have called a troll. You're
giving rather mixed messages off there. :-(

And no, its not a "google it" reply. I gave a very specific searchterm,
resulting in a page with references to several of the same discussions.
Yep, thats me. I do not suggest such stuff with first checking if its
actually helpfull. :-)

> I just want to find someone who knows more than I do, to help
> guide me.

Again, do not ask for full guidance. Ask for a suggestion for a program
which will allow eazy geoPDF stitching, *mentioning* (not requiring) your
preference(s) in that regard.

I hope you find what you are looking for (and its not just for another
tutorial, amirite ?)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[R.Wieser]

Arlen,

Something I only realized later:

You've posted your question into both the Linux as well as a Windows
newsgroup. Although there might be a lot of people there, the chance that
any of them use, or even know about geoPDFs is rather small.

I suggest you find out which specific groups actually use those maps (hobby
aviationists ?) and see if they have newsgroups (or another other kind of a
conversation nexus), and put your question (which program is easiest to use
in regard to geoPDF stitching) forward there.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

P.s.
Yesterday I downloaded a couple of geoPDFs (to look into them), and
re-realized why programs for manipulating them are not a dime-a-dozen. Its
a fricking PDF (duh!), and not at all easy to extract information from /
manipulate. Thats because, AFAIK the format is still proprietary and
encumbered by patents.

I see that there are also geoTIFFs (and similar others that are much easier
to work with, image wise), but as I have not seen you mention anything about
them ...

[Arlen Holder]

On 14 Jul 2018 12:04:52 GMT, R.Wieser wrote:

> No, you wouldn't. Anyone exiting from a cave dive will have learned how
> to dive *way* before doing this one, and have made the right decisions. All
> the others have become floaters, and can get their Darwin award from st
> peters desk (if you have been send down you have to ask for it. They're not
> as nice over there)

You whooshed on the point of the example.

> You're not asking for experts, you're just asking for someone with more
> experience than you.

This is the first correct statement you've made, but it still doesn't help
to answer the question because it's a platitude.

> You already know what you want. All you need to do is to read the reviews
> about the different programs offering it, and pick the one who you think you
> like best. And you've already show that you are able to find those
> programs yourself.

This is the second correct statement you've made. Another platitude, but at
least it's a correct platitudes.

> So what do you need those "experts" for ? To take you by the hand and
> lead you thru your "cave dive" ?

You don't seem to understand that all you can offer are platitudes.

Someone, a kind and helpful person named Bill Bradshaw, as I recall, from
Anchorage Alaska, had suggested OziExplorer, long ago, and it works fine -
but ....

It's too complicated, mainly due to format conversion issues.

It's like he suggested a convoluted path through the woods.

A person who knows the woods can find a better shortcut than a person who
doesn't know the woods. I'm trying to find someone tho knows the woods.
That's not you.

All you can offer are platitudes that not only do I already known but I
knew them decades ago. I've long ago progressed well past the stage where
you can offer any technical help.

That's not to say you're not trying to be helpful - but - you can't help me
since my question requires knowledge you just don't have, and, frankly,
almost nobody has. (If it were that easy, I wouldn't need to ask it.)

>> Also, it seems, from your post, that you may have never georeferenced
>> a file,
> And neither have you, as you directly folow that up with:
>> at least with OziExplorer.
> Maybe your choice of program made it all that complicated ?

This is the third true thing you've said, again, a mere platitude, which is
that georeferencing is conceptually simple, so all I need to find is a
program that makes the process simple.

Which program is that?
(Hint: If you pull a Wolf K on me, you're just wasting everyone's time.)

> Wel, its easy: I ask others to figure all the problems out, and than hand me
> the results. Just like you ... Easy-peasy. :-D :-(

This statement shows that you are arguing the position of a child.

Why do you make that child's argument?
I don't know why.

Maybe I hurt your feelings by telling you the truth, which is that you
don't have the knowledge needed to offer help.
Sorry. But it's true.

I'm gonna read the rest of your post, but, really, when you answer a
technical question with platitudes and then you devolve to arguing the
position of a small child, there's nowhere this post can go but further
down into the abyss.

I do appreciate that you're *trying* to help.

But the fact is that I wouldn't have asked the *technical* questions if
platitudes would have solved it.

It's ok for a technical thread to have zero responses because that just
means it's a hard question to answer. It wouldn't have been asked if it
could have been answered with platitudes.

I'll solve it as I always do.
I was simply looking for advice from someone who knows more than I do.

[Arlen Holder]

On 14 Jul 2018 23:24:30 GMT, R.Wieser wrote:
> I see that there are also geoTIFFs (and similar others that are much easier
> to work with, image wise), but as I have not seen you mention anything about
> them ...

The initial starting point is the USGS geoPDF.

The OziExplorer tutorial I wrote long ago saves them in the TIFF format.

The whole format-conversion issue is a morass that I won't get into for
this discussion since it's unrelated to the original question.

[Arlen Holder]

On 15 Jul 2018 07:37:53 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:
> The initial starting point is the USGS geoPDF.

Hi Rudy,

I do appreciate that you're trtying to be helpful, so I thank you for your
effort, especially since you seem to have gone the extra mile to actually
look into the geoPDFs (which contain a complexity of layers).

I forgot to include the reference for the initial USGS starting point:
<https://nationalmap.gov/ustopo/>

In looking that up for you, I went to my work-in-progress tutorial for
Android/iOS users (which hasn't been posted yet).

Here is that WIP tutorial (again, this has never been posted), where the
part about using USGS geoPDFs is easy, but, if someone wants to *combine*
multiple geoPDFs, that's where the question of this thread comes up.

Anyway, here's the nascent tutorial for iOS/Android users which contains
more specific URLs for accessing a geoPDF in an area of the users' choice:
****************************************************************
Tutorial: Free "Active" US Current & Historic USGS
GeoPDF Topographic Maps on both Android & iOS
< THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS - IT IS NOT FINISHED >
****************************************************************
The tutorial below is wholly based on this USGS video training:
<https://www.usgs.gov/media/videos/using-us-topo-and-historic-topo-maps-your-mobile-device>
NOTE: USGS topo maps are *far* more accurate than OSM topo maps!

This tutorial covers downloading & installing:
a. GeoCalibrated current & historical USGS maps (available free)
b. Avenza map app (iOS & Android, free, registration is optional)

The advantages of using the admittedly simple Avenza map software are:
a. Avenza is cross platform freeware on both iOS and Android
b. Avenza is tested and suggested by the USGS
c. Avenza imports custom geocalibrated topographic maps.
WIP: Need to add a section for how to georeference any PDF map.
WIP: I need to add a section to *combine* individual USGS geoPDFs.

The disadvantages of using Avenza are:
a. It's a basic application where other map apps have more power
WIP: I need to add a section for using better map apps.

The reason for using Avenza in this tutorial is because the first time you
import a georeferenced map, you want the process to work, where we know
that the USGS maps were tested with that software, so your first import of
USGS geoPDFs should be using the software the USGS recommends.

1. Install Avenza Maps freeware <https://www.avenzamaps.com/>
Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.Avenza>
iOS <https://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/avenza-pdf-maps/id388424049?mt=8>

2. Download the 3 most important to you geocalibrated maps:
Go to http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/apps/mobile_client
Maps > (select Baselayer = USGS Topo)
Maps > (zoom to, very roughly, your current location)
Press "Go to Datasets"
Press "US Topo"
Press "Find Products"
Press "Add to Cart" for each map quadrangle you want to download
Note: For the freeware, choose only the 3 most important quadrangles!
Press "Go to Cart"
Long press on each selected geoPDF to download via the web
Note: Each of my maps was about 25MB in size

3. Import those downloaded geocalibrated PDFs into your map app:
Use your file manager to go to your "Downloads" folder
On Android, that's /storage/emulated/0/Download/*.pdf
Run Avenza & select the (+) icon
Select "Add Folder" & give it a name (e.g., SanJose)
Select that folder to step into it
Press the (+0 icon again & select "Download or import a map"
Select "From Device Storage" & choose each of your geoPDFs
Now all your maps are "loaded" into the Avenza freeware
Note: Only the first 3 will be GPS aware for location & tracking

A. As a quick test of Avenza, let's start tracking on the USGS map:
In Avenza, select a map that contains your current location.
Press the location icon; it should bluedot your location on the map.
Press the wrench icon & then the "Record GPS Tracks" menu item.
That should start tracking your movement on the map.
Press "Done" when you want to stop tracking.

B. As another quick test of Avenza, measure heading & distance:
In Avenza, selec a map of interest to you.
Press the wrench icon & then the ""Draw and Measure" item
Place the crosshair on the 1st point by moving the map underneath
Tap once, on that crosshair, to "anchor" it to that 1st point
Then move the underlying map so the crosshair is at the 2nd point
Tap once, on that crosshair, to "anchor" it to that 2nd point
A total distance, bearing, & elevation change will be displayed
Continue on the next segment, if desired.

WIP: Need to add a section suggesting more functional software!
Better software would have most or all these attributes:
1. Offline (i.e, maps can be downloaded or tiles can be cached)
2. USGS (OSM topo maps suck on accuracy compared to USGS topo maps)
3. Locate (it should bluedot your current location)
4. Track (it should save a gpx track of your current hike)
5. Route (it should route along a previously saved track)
6. Free (it should be free, and displaying no ads is always best)

In summary, above is a tutorial based on USGS recommendations explaining
how to use the cross-platform Avenza iOS/Android freeware to load
customized USGS geocalibrated tiles for location and tracking.

As always, please improve so that all benefit from every effort.
****************************************************************

[John Doe]

Spam/troll, usually from Google Groups...

--
Arlen Holder <arlenholder nospam.net> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.mixmin.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Arlen Holder <arlenholder nospam.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.os.linux,alt.satellite.gps
> Subject: What free tools, on Windows & Linux, georeference PDF maps?
> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 14:19:05 -0000 (UTC)
> Organization: NOYB
> Message-ID: <pid0ol$vt1$1 news.mixmin.net>
> Injection-Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 14:19:05 -0000 (UTC)
> Injection-Info: news.mixmin.net; posting-host="4deda5e1f79a301ff3aa89e7249f79635e1cdaa3"; logging-data="32673"; mail-complaints-to="abuse mixmin.net"
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org alt.comp.os.windows-10:73503 alt.os.linux:49790 alt.satellite.gps:4103

[Chris]

R.Wieser <add...@not.available> wrote:
> Arlen,
>
> Something I only realized later:
>
> You've posted your question into both the Linux as well as a Windows
> newsgroup. Although there might be a lot of people there, the chance that
> any of them use, or even know about geoPDFs is rather small.
>
> I suggest you find out which specific groups actually use those maps (hobby
> aviationists ?) and see if they have newsgroups (or another other kind of a
> conversation nexus), and put your question (which program is easiest to use
> in regard to geoPDF stitching) forward there.
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser
>
> P.s.
> Yesterday I downloaded a couple of geoPDFs (to look into them), and
> re-realized why programs for manipulating them are not a dime-a-dozen. Its
> a fricking PDF (duh!), and not at all easy to extract information from /
> manipulate. Thats because, AFAIK the format is still proprietary and
> encumbered by patents.

PDF is an open standard and has been since 2008
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF

There are some proprietary extensions, but they are niche and specific to
Adobe.

Having said that geoPDFs are an extension of the standard, which requires
additional support by clients.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geospatial_PDF

[R.Wieser]

Arlen,

> You whooshed on the point of the example.

Not really. I just tried to point out that your approach of your problem is
a bit ... skewed. You learn about the method of approach *and* the target
*before* you go in, not while.

If you would use the same ad-hoc method with a possible geoPDF stritching
program its no wonder that you fail, and your project dies. Just like a
person who would think he could do a scuba-dive into a cave he knows zich
about.

I think there are way more similarities between your approach of your
problem and that cave dive than you realize. :-)

>> You're not asking for experts, you're just asking for someone with
>> more experience than you.
>
> This is the first correct statement you've made, but it still doesn't
> help to answer the question because it's a platitude.

Is it now time for me to say "whoosh" ?

They where not ment to answer your current question, they where ment to help
*you*. As long as you, among others, kick everyone to the shins by
insinuating that only a man better/smarter than yourself can help you,
expect from others to do for you what you can easily do yourself, and to
take you by the hand, doing everything for you as if you are a noobie not
even able to use a helpfile or use Google (nonwithstanding your attitude
that you outsmart us all) you create resentment, and from it an unwill to
help you. Loose those attitudes, and you might get some replies (even if
not *exactly* what you want).

Remember, you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

> I'm trying to find someone tho knows the woods.

No, you're not. You are trying to find someone who knows *all* the woods,
and can tell you where you can find one exactly matching your specific
requirements - even though a list of all the woods and their attributes is
available on the web and you could search for yourself.

And after having done all that work for you you expect him to take you by
the hand to show you the easiest path thru it - even though the store
outside of it has free maps of of the wood, showing you every path you can
take as well as which paths are most often used.

Also, by throwing the name of that specific wood into Google you might well
find other peoples notitions about their exploration of it - information
which you seem to all but ignore. :-(


In short, you have all the (repeated) appearance of asking others to do
*all* the work, and you just reap the rewards. And no, no ammount of
claiming "I've already done a lot myself" changes anything to that.

... which I tried to shortcut by suggesting you post what you (already)
tried, what it does and how it does not match what you're after. You know,
questions to a specific problem you've encountered.

> so all I need to find is a program that makes the process simple.
>
> Which program is that?

That is pretty-much exactly what I said in my previous program you should be
asking for. :-)

Simple, and without a set of "must also" requirements.

The only thing left is to put that into a decent question, and post it at a
place where it has most chance of getting answered. And thats definitily
*not* in a generic Linux or Windows group.

> I've long ago progressed well past the stage where you can
> offer any technical help.

How is "what is the easiest-to-use geoPDF stiching program available" in any
way a technical question ? And no, "which buttons do I have to push to
make it happen ?" isn't technical either I'm afraid.


But, you're right. I cannot help you with your current question (which is
all you seem to care about). So, goodbye, and I'm sorry to see another of
your projects die a prolonged death. (The project is viable. The way you
are handling it is not)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

P.s.

> You don't seem to understand that all you can offer are platitudes.

You do not seem to understand that I'm asking you to think about *how* you
are asking your questions, and how your shown attitude in it effectivily
blocks you from getting answers.

[R.Wieser]

Chris,

> PDF is an open standard and has been since 2008
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF

I stand corrected. Thanks for the heads-up as well as the links.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[Arlen Holder]

On 15 Jul 2018 11:45:14 GMT, R.Wieser wrote:

>> PDF is an open standard and has been since 2008
>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF
>
> I stand corrected. Thanks for the heads-up as well as the links.

Presumably unbiased view of Geospacial PDF & GeoPDF:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geospatial_PDF>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoPDF>
"GeoPDF is best thought of as a branded instance of geospatial PDF."

Then there's "openGeoPDF" which has no wikipedia, so we'll use this:
<http://www.terragotech.com/products/terrago-publisher/opengeopdf>

What is a geoPDF from the USGS:
<https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-a-geopdf>

About geospatial PDFs from Adobe:
<https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/using/geospatial-pdfs.html>

OpenGeoPDF vs. Geospatial PDF opengeopdf from the owner of the trademark:
<http://www.terragotech.com/products/terrago-publisher/geopdf-vs-geospatial-pdf>
<http://www.terragotech.com/company/news/601-terrago-unveils-groundbreaking-opengeopdf-technology>

What is GeoPDF or Geospatial PDF from a 3rd-party site that equates them:
<https://www.evergreenmtb.org/faq/what-is-geopdf-or-geospatial-pdf>

In short, they are all the same, they are all completely different, and the
definition changes depending on whom you speak to and whether they're
protected a trademark, or using it or not protecting a trademark and not
using it (e.g., the USGS seems to be moving toward geospacial PDF
terminology.

[Arlen Holder]

On 15 Jul 2018 08:24:11 GMT, John Doe wrote:

> Spam/troll, usually from Google Groups...

Says the cowardly bully troll John Doe, who, clearly can't ever add
on-topic technical value and has *never* added value to *any* thread in his
entire life.

[Arlen Holder]

On 15 Jul 2018 03:29:57 GMT, R.Wieser wrote:

> I just tried to point out that your approach of your problem is
> a bit ... skewed. You learn about the method of approach *and* the target
> *before* you go in, not while.

Three things:
1. I (almost) always solve the problem (usually sooner rather than later);
2. You can't possibly help (simply because it's too complex for you);
3. But, you *tried* to help - which is what counts most.

Thanks for at least looking up the software, and the formats, and for the
attempt at offering technical advice.

For that, I appreciate your posts.
But this thread has been *useless* for the original question.

So, unless someone actually knows something about the stated problem, then
this thread is dead until I post the solution.

[Arlen Holder]

*TECHNICAL UPDATE:*

I just tested a working solution on Windows using the Quantum GIS freeware,
which also works on Linux and on the Mac, so I'm sure it's a cross-platform
solution that everyone can benefit from.

How to view & edit tracks on USGS WMS databases using QGIS freeeware
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/IeNTm2cOrd8/F_ftT-p5CAAJ>

In addition, for cross-platform mobile devices, this solution works:

How to record tracks on USGS geocalibrated PDFs using Avenza freeware
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/zNKD3jyeye4>

How to record GPX tracks on iOS & Android freeware & copy to the desktop
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/zNKD3jyeye4/vxLvk87oAgAJ>

This solution, unfortunately, only works on Windows at this time! :(

How to freely geocalibrate multiple USGS quadrangles into a single PDF map
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/W3IjaKFeLrM/TpFbNWiIAAAJ>

What's missing, I think, are the following missing Windows/Linux solutions:
a. How to use the Quantum GIS USGS WMS method wholly offline (if possible)
b. How to combine & geoCalibrate USGS geoPDF quadrangles using Quantum GIS

The reason that (a) is needed is because it's a bad idea to be required to
use the Internet for personal private mapping solutions, while the reason
for (b) is that the Avenza solution on the mobile device sucks when your
hike crosses USGS quadrangle borders (which it often will do) so you need
to be able to combine geocalibrated PDFs on the Windows or Linux desktop.

(The current free solution for combining geoPDFs only works on Windows.)

[Arlen Holder]

*ANOTHER TECHNICAL UPDATE:*

============================================================================
Here's how anyone on this ng can print their nearest USGS quadrangles.
============================================================================
Download & print USGS PDF maps of the desired quadrangles nearest you:

1. Create a directory to store your downloaded USGS topographic maps:
For example: mkdir -p $HOME/database/map/usgs/
2. Visit the USGS National Map Data Download & Visualization Services site:
https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/launch/
3. At top left, press "Download Maps" which takes you to a multipane page:
https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=histtopo,ustopo&title=Map%20View
Note the right pane contains a map of the United States.
4. Left mouse drag your desired location to the center of that map.
Click the + (zoom) 7 times (re-center as needed) to see quadrangles.
It's simplest if you zoom until you have only 1 or 2 quadrangles in view.
At most, zoom to only as many as 4 contiguous four-corner quadrangles.
5. In the left sidebar, click the blue "Find Products" button.
6. In the left sidebar under "Available Products", click "US Topo" "results".
7. In the left sidebar, scroll until you see the desired quadrangle.
Once you find the desired quadrangle, right click its "Download" button.
Choose to "Save Link As" so as to download the ~30MB PDF file.
8. Save the ~30MB PDFs using the default name of the quadrangle.pdf
For example:
$HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_Laurel_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
$HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_Loma_Prieta_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
$HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_San_Jose_West_20150304_TM_geo.pdf
$HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_Santa_Teresa_Hills_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
etc.

Read this document for instructions on how to interpret USGS map margins:
<http://education.usgs.gov/lessons/mapmargin.pdf> (details)
<http://education.usgs.gov/lessons/map_margins_2p.pdf> (summary)
============================================================================
I called a local Kinkos/FedEx printer who charges $7.25 per sqft for color
printing on regular paper. So a 2.5x2.5 foot color map on regular paper
they said would be about $73.48 with California tax. Yikes.

It's much cheaper to print to 8-1/2x11-inch paper using a freeware tiler:
<https://sourceforge.net/projects/posterazor/>
And then manually tape it together.
============================================================================
See also:

How to view & edit tracks on USGS WMS databases using QGIS freeeware
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/IeNTm2cOrd8/F_ftT-p5CAAJ>

How to record tracks on USGS geocalibrated PDFs using Avenza freeware
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/zNKD3jyeye4>

How to record GPX tracks on iOS & Android freeware & copy to the desktop
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/zNKD3jyeye4/vxLvk87oAgAJ>

How to freely geocalibrate multiple USGS quadrangles into a single PDF map
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/W3IjaKFeLrM/TpFbNWiIAAAJ>

============================================================================

[Arlen Holder]

On 10 Aug 2018 23:06:05 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> 8. Save the ~30MB PDFs using the default name of the quadrangle.pdf
> For example:
> $HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_Laurel_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
> $HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_Loma_Prieta_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
> $HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_San_Jose_West_20150304_TM_geo.pdf
> $HOME/database/map/usgs/CA_Santa_Teresa_Hills_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
> etc.

I just combined those four quadrangles, which seemed to work fine offline!

Here's what I just tried after downloading a set of four geospatial PDFs
using the method and file types outlined in this post of a few moments ago:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/W3IjaKFeLrM/BCWbshWoCAAJ>

I figured I'd try a single quadrangle first, before trying to tile them.
I wasn't sure if the USGS geospatial PDFs are "vector" or "raster".
So I guessed at "vector" first.

This pretty much worked, with minor complications of too many layers:
. View the newly downloaded CA_Loma_Prieta_20150226_TM_geo.pdf file:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4462770geopdf00.jpg>
. Start Quantum GIS 3.2.1 on Windows 10
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9663160geopdf01.jpg>
. QGIS:Layer > Add Layer > Add Vector Layer >
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=7538129geopdf02.jpg>
. Data Source Manager Vector > Source
Vector Dataset(s) = C:\tmp\CA_Loma_Prieta_20150226_TM_geo.pdf
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5773673geopdf03.jpg>
. Click [Add] (It's so slow, be careful not to click twice!)
. It asks "Select Vector Layers to Add"
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5004482geopdf04.jpg>
. Not knowing any better, I hit [Select All]
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5858855geopdf05.jpg>
. And then [OK] (It's so slow, be careful not to click twice!)
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1424688geopdf06.jpg>
. And then [Close] (Be careful to only click once.)
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3545122geopdf07.jpg>

Well, that worked (albeit, as BeAr Ederson had warned, rather slowly).
At least it's offline - which always is the goal all along.

But now, the question comes how to *join* the four quadrangles in QGIS?

Trying that process with a second quadrangle, seems to kind of work:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9247140geopdf08.jpg>
*Notice in that screenshot that the corners actually line up!*

Let's bring in a third contiguous quadrangle:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9176734geopdf09.jpg>
And, the fourth:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=7754255geopdf10.jpg>

At this point, I decided to add the hiking track that I had saved.
And then to zoom to the layer of that track.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8848544geopdf11.jpg>

Notice it worked, kind of sort of, but not really all that well:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1819179geopdf12.jpg>

The good news is that the USGS geospatial PDF quadrangles seem to line
themselves up automatically, with the borders overlapping such that the
actual map corners coincide at the correct GPS corner dots.

I'm not sure how to make the four quadrangle map borders go away, but
that's probably a "layer" that I hope can be made invisible.

[Arlen Holder]

On 11 Aug 2018 00:46:22 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> I just combined those four quadrangles, which seemed to work fine offline!

QGIS is working a LOT better now that I'm getting the hang of layers!
The only thing I have left, I think, is to create a single large geospatial
PDF out of the four quadrangle geospacial PDFs!

Here's the progress so far...

I loaded in the offline geospatial PDFs for the four quadrangles,
which, when I turn on only the track and the terrain countours shows up
quite beautifully!
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1343863layers01.jpg>

I'm not sure yet how to export the four quadrangles as a single map file
(for input into Avenza crippleware on the iOS & Android mobile devices);
but the great news is that the four maps aiign themselves perfectly
automatically!
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8243968layers02.jpg>

It's amazing that the Quantum GIS software figures all this out!
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=2137812layers03.jpg>

The result is that the four maps fit perfectly (where the blue lines you
see here I put in after the fact to show where the map borders were):
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9710070layers04.jpg>

About the only thing I need to do now is save these four geospatial PDF
quadrangles as a *single* (four-times larger) geospatial PDF quadrangle.

If that works - I think we've achieved the goal set out in the beginning of
this thread.

Turning off the borders was due to turning off:
[_]Map Frame Projection and Grids
And I also turned off some of the grids
[_]Map Collar Map Elements
[_]Map Frame PLSS
[_]Map Frame Woodland

I've turned on the following "features" to view & save:
[x]Map Frame Terrain Contours
[x]Map Frame Geographic Names
[xMap Frame Boundaries Jurisdictional Boundaries County or Equivalent
[xMap Frame Geographic Names
[xMap Frame Hydrography
[xMap Frame Structures
[xMap Frame Transportation Road Features
[xMap Frame Transportation Road Names and Shields

One by one I turned things on or off to get just what I wanted to see:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6468310layers05.jpg>

This I saved as the perfect combination of the four quadrangles:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=2229776layers06.jpg>

And then I exported that database to PDF:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9861338layers07.jpg>

The question is whether that PDF is a geospatial PDF that can be used on
the mobile device in the Avenza crippleware to display tracks.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8814128layers08.jpg>

Darn. That didn't work. It was just a "normal" PDf and not a geospatial
PDF.

I think I should have right clicked on the database, and then saved as
"Geospatial PDF" format like I did earlier perhaps...
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8835052layers09.jpg>

The true test will be whether Avenza crippleware on iOS & Android will
track on this saved geospacial four-quadrangle PDF - but for now - I need a
quick test to figure out if a PDF is a regular PDF or a geospatial PDF.