Gigapan image of intracanyon lava flows, Owyhee River, OR.

Thanks to Ian for reminding me that I can embed gigapans on the new version of my blog. Thought that I would start with this one because we just sent some separates (holocrystalline groundmass) to New Mexico Tech for irradiation prior to Ar-Ar analysis. The sample from here comes from the conspicuous gray wedge of lava that you can see slightly below center on the left edge of the image...zoom in and you can see the Paleomag team and their sample holes. The paleomag sample locations here and elsewhere along the Owyhee have been sampled by our team's paleomagician in the interest of both paleomag analysis and Ar-Ar dating. Handy! The basalt flows in this image are early Pleistocene intracanyon lavas that occupy a paleochannel of the Owyhee River, Oregon. The base of the lowest flow of the three main flows is a couple of hundred feet above the modern river. We already know that the flows have reversed polarity, but we are dying to know their radiometric age. If you find this type of image interesting, I have many more at Gigapan.org (http://www.gigapan.org/profiles/9168/). More importantly, however, go get yourself a gigapan robot. You will be pleased.

Jerque's New [GPS] unit

I recently convinced myself that I had lost my trusty Garmin 60Csx. I was truly upset, but I cleverly leveraged the situation to purchase a fancier Garmin Oregon 550T. And, yes, I found the other unit in a 'hidden' pocket in a new pack I got at GSA in Portland. Sweet! Two units! Why the Oregon 550T? Well, why not? It is pretty sweet. The 450T that I demo'd at REI had a weird matte-like touch screen that I didn't like; whereas the 550T screen was nice and smooth. The 550T also had a camera that could, obviously, geotag any photos that I would take with it. Trust me, I knew that  the camera wouldn't be great, but suspected it could do in a pinch. I was actually pretty skeptical about whether I would like this thing or not. I was fully prepared to exploit the REI 'Return Every Item' policy if I didn't enjoy it (no shame here, have been a member since 1985). Turns out however, that I like it and it quickly supplanted the 60Csx as my unit of choice. My primary concern was the screen brightness issue that I had read about online. I am pretty concerned about this problem as it has resulted in my Panasonic Toughbook field computer sitting on a shelf for the last 2 or 3 years. The Toughbook, despite what Panasonic may tell you, doesn't work worth a crap in the sun...I map in the desert 90% of the time...you do the math. Actually, the screen on the Oregon works fine in the sun if not a little better than it does in filtered light. The touchscreen is far more pleasant to work with than the horribly tired rocker panel approach of the 60Csx. My only continuing complaint is that neither device can recognize a systematic pattern in waypoint naming and thus eliminate the need for multiple character entry. Am I wrong here? By far the best things about the Oregon are:
  1. Map detail. The shaded relief is particularly nice at 100k and larger. 24k base maps looks great as well...either the free ones or the paid ones (I have both, don't ask).
  2. Computer interface is smoother than the 60Csx. Behaves as expected when plugged into USB.
  3. Custom map option is freakin' huge! With a little effort you can upload any map or image you want. Even uses kml....zowie! Learning curve is present.
  4. Forthcoming 'Birdseye' satellite data may very well be the best innovation yet for handheld mapping assistance (at least in the desert). Maybe I will quit breaking out my Blackberry with Google Maps when I am in cell range...
  5. The camera doesn't suck, but it is not good enough to supplant my preferred field camera(s).
  6. I dig the carabiner attachment.
  7. It feels good in your hand.
  8. Works pretty well at a window seat on a commercial airliner...as does the 60Csx (Great time passer. Now more fun with nice base map of US). Planes go fast.

Media_httpgeofrothorg_jvmaa

Things I do not like as much:
  1. Why can't it recognize the systematic pattern in my waypoint naming and save me some time?
  2. Related Basecamp software has potential but needs work.
  3. This thing costs a lot! Try the Dakota or the lower numbered Oregon units to save some dough.
  4. The waypoint averaging is complicated and too involved for practical application. But I did learn about it on a handy new Garmin Blog: http://garmin.blogs.com/my_weblog/outdoorrec/
  5. Battery life seems less than 60Csx. Interestingly, it comes with NiMh bats and a charger.
  6. No Garmin units seem to allow you to use GPS elevation in place of barometric altimeter to get profile data.
Overall, I do really like this unit and will soon test how well my feeble mind can handle the custom map options and report back. So far my experiments worked ok. I will also jump on the satellite imagery option the day it becomes available. Alas, note below that the camera is weak overall...but will do in a pinch. There are other ways to geotag your photos that take only a little more thought. Here is a comparison of photos taken with my field Pentax (top) and the Oregon GPS (same time, same place):
Media_httplh3ggphtcom_srdee
Media_httplh4ggphtcom_tgiws

Digital Mapping Nirvana?....Almost

I recently acquired a Wacom Cintiq Interactive Pen Display and it was worth every penny of the $1999 that it cost me. Sure, that sounds like a lot. However, I work on a lot of maps. Without going into detail, I will just note that my commitment to over-commitment is a problem. I truly need to develop ways to more quickly and accurately compile my mapping in a digital form. Nothing (aside from LiDAR, maybe) has streamlined my mapping workflow more than being able to map directly on the surface of a high-resolution monitor. It is one-step beyond my previous advice to run out and get yourself a wacom digitizing tablet because it removes the final level of abstraction that separated your eyes from your work. Since the monitor is quite pricey, it may be a stretch for the average 'joe' (you know who you are). The next best step, the digitizing tablet, is an excellent way to go if that is your limit. Put plainly, you are a pitiable fool for not using either of them. Sorry to say that, but it is true.  Deal with it. I will admit that some of my colleagues that I have goaded into trying the tablet (haven't let anyone touch the monitor yet) have had some issues and, unbelievably, returned to clicking their freaking mice for miles across the virtual landscape. As I have said in the past: can your write your name with your mouse...of course you can't. Why then do you think you can map your favorite intricate contact with one better than you can with a pen? The digitizing tablet / monitor approach is far more efficient. You can program buttons on the pen and the tablet to substitute for frequent commands you use in the program of interest. In the case of the tablet, you can change its inclination to suit your ergonomic needs and can even freely rotate it through a large range of angles to get the perfect attack on the cryptic  contact you think is so important. The Cintiq rocks for geologic mapping. Convince your boss to buy one, or write it into your next geologic mapping proposal. Don't be a slave to a mouse...how embarrassing is that? Disclosure: I am left-handed but also moderately ambidextrous. I use my mouse with my right hand. I use the pen in my left. I use them both when madly mapping in ArcGIS.
Media_httpgeologicfro_hpgav