GlastoMap - new version

[cerv]

On 4/30/2017 at 1:03 PM, Keithy said:

Out of curosity, did Glastonbury ever clarify why they stopped use of the image other than copyright reasons and have they given any indication of lifting it?

Hi,

To clarify: I had always been given permission to use the aerial pic by the festival so I was never actually infringing their copyright. They withdrew that permission after I updated it last year. The reason I was given was that some people (maybe neighbours or security? I’m not sure ) had seen it and weren’t happy with the level of detail that was on view. I was told someone was contacting ME directly about it. To avoid any further internal aggro they wanted it taken down.

I asked more than once if we could find a compromise of some kind (e.g. blur out sensitive areas, reduce the level of zoom) but I never got a response. Subsequently some other people indirectly connected with the festival got in touch to give their own take on things based on their dealings with the festival. Without going into too much detail I think there was a worry the site was infringing on the brand a bit and that may have also been a contributory factor (not the only one I’m sure).

My take is that while it had been quietly popular it had flown under the radar of a lot of people at the festival. The initial complaint from whoever forced more senior people to look at it and they quickly decided it shouldn’t be allowed.  I always thought it was fantastic I’d been given permission to use it in the first place so I guess I wasn’t surprised that some other senior bods had a different opinion to the guy who gave permission over the years.

It’s a shame; would love to bring it back on-line as I had more things I wanted to add to it. I tried tweeting Emily, as did some others. She replied to one person asking what it was about, I replied with an explanation but nothing more happened after that. I had a plan B which was to create an illustrated map but I’ve just not had the time to create it and with the rumours over winter that the festival might move etc. it did not seem worth investing the time if it might only be used one more time. That’s changed now obviously so you never know ;-)

[ghostdancer1]

rather than the effort of creating an illustrated one, could you just apply some sort of filter in Photoshop (or similar) which distorts it a bit?

[Havors]

1 hour ago, cerv said:

Hi,

To clarify: I had always been given permission to use the aerial pic by the festival so I was never actually infringing their copyright. They withdrew that permission after I updated it last year. The reason I was given was that some people (maybe neighbours or security? I’m not sure ) had seen it and weren’t happy with the level of detail that was on view. I was told someone was contacting ME directly about it. To avoid any further internal aggro they wanted it taken down.

I asked more than once if we could find a compromise of some kind (e.g. blur out sensitive areas, reduce the level of zoom) but I never got a response. Subsequently some other people indirectly connected with the festival got in touch to give their own take on things based on their dealings with the festival. Without going into too much detail I think there was a worry the site was infringing on the brand a bit and that may have also been a contributory factor (not the only one I’m sure).

My take is that while it had been quietly popular it had flown under the radar of a lot of people at the festival. The initial complaint from whoever forced more senior people to look at it and they quickly decided it shouldn’t be allowed.  I always thought it was fantastic I’d been given permission to use it in the first place so I guess I wasn’t surprised that some other senior bods had a different opinion to the guy who gave permission over the years.

It’s a shame; would love to bring it back on-line as I had more things I wanted to add to it. I tried tweeting Emily, as did some others. She replied to one person asking what it was about, I replied with an explanation but nothing more happened after that. I had a plan B which was to create an illustrated map but I’ve just not had the time to create it and with the rumours over winter that the festival might move etc. it did not seem worth investing the time if it might only be used one more time. That’s changed now obviously so you never know ;-)

Just do it. Host it somewhere they have no jurisdiction and fight the power!

[Keithy]

2 hours ago, cerv said:

Hi,

To clarify: I had always been given permission to use the aerial pic by the festival so I was never actually infringing their copyright. They withdrew that permission after I updated it last year. The reason I was given was that some people (maybe neighbours or security? I’m not sure ) had seen it and weren’t happy with the level of detail that was on view. I was told someone was contacting ME directly about it. To avoid any further internal aggro they wanted it taken down.

I asked more than once if we could find a compromise of some kind (e.g. blur out sensitive areas, reduce the level of zoom) but I never got a response. Subsequently some other people indirectly connected with the festival got in touch to give their own take on things based on their dealings with the festival. Without going into too much detail I think there was a worry the site was infringing on the brand a bit and that may have also been a contributory factor (not the only one I’m sure).

My take is that while it had been quietly popular it had flown under the radar of a lot of people at the festival. The initial complaint from whoever forced more senior people to look at it and they quickly decided it shouldn’t be allowed.  I always thought it was fantastic I’d been given permission to use it in the first place so I guess I wasn’t surprised that some other senior bods had a different opinion to the guy who gave permission over the years.

It’s a shame; would love to bring it back on-line as I had more things I wanted to add to it. I tried tweeting Emily, as did some others. She replied to one person asking what it was about, I replied with an explanation but nothing more happened after that. I had a plan B which was to create an illustrated map but I’ve just not had the time to create it and with the rumours over winter that the festival might move etc. it did not seem worth investing the time if it might only be used one more time. That’s changed now obviously so you never know ;-)

Cheers for the update cerv. Was rather optimistically hoping that things were happening in the background between you and Glastonbury that you couldn't talk about and that you were linking up to create an official GlastoMap.

It's quite disappointing from Glastonbury; the map they provide is actually quite crap for a festival of it's size and GlastoMap was a brilliant alternative.

[Padgey]

Looking at Glastomap was one of the things that got me excited leading up to the festival, let's hope we get it back.

[fur_q]

On 02/05/2017 at 11:58 AM, Keithy said:

Cheers for the update cerv. Was rather optimistically hoping that things were happening in the background between you and Glastonbury that you couldn't talk about and that you were linking up to create an official GlastoMap.

It's quite disappointing from Glastonbury; the map they provide is actually quite crap for a festival of it's size and GlastoMap was a brilliant alternative.

Since GFL don't want you to see it   you should definitely not look for cached versions of it on a populate web archive site.  

[Keithy]

39 minutes ago, fur_q said:

Since GFL don't want you to see it   you should definitely not look for cached versions of it on a populate web archive site.  

Whilst true, part of the joy of Glastomap was it being updated and being able to drop your own tags....which really helped when coordinating a large camping group on where exactly we were camping.

[musky]

On 02/05/2017 at 9:52 AM, cerv said:

Without going into too much detail I think there was a worry the site was infringing on the brand a bit and that may have also been a contributory factor (not the only one I’m sure).

Out of all the possible reasons for asking for the site to be taken down, this one must be the most disappointing.

It's a shame it had to go, but thanks for all the hard work Cerv.

[cerv]

11 hours ago, musky said:

Out of all the possible reasons for asking for the site to be taken down, this one must be the most disappointing.

It's a shame it had to go, but thanks for all the hard work Cerv.

Yeah, sad if it is true. I can't say that's definitely the case as it was 2nd hand information. I mention it because it might explain why there was no interest at all in resolving the original complaint (that too much detail was on show).

Thanks for the kind words!

[Havors]

25 minutes ago, cerv said:

Yeah, sad if it is true. I can't say that's definitely the case as it was 2nd hand information. I mention it because it might explain why there was no interest at all in resolving the original complaint (that too much detail was on show).

Thanks for the kind words!

Just do it!! Like I said, somewhere they cant take it down? or ask for it to be taken down?? Get a Russian to do it  

 

[Mickball]

1 hour ago, cerv said:

Yeah, sad if it is true. I can't say that's definitely the case as it was 2nd hand information. I mention it because it might explain why there was no interest at all in resolving the original complaint (that too much detail was on show).

Thanks for the kind words!

Is the full, hi-res image available anywhere, or would one have to reconstruct it from the tiles on the web archive?

[siblin]

For a while google had a satellite view of the site during festival time but now it seems to be its muddied-up post festival state:

Perhaps GFL had a word with them too   Glastoearth was good but a bit busy (had everything on) and hasn't been updated since 2014 I don't believe.  We deffo need better maps!

[Michaels denim shorts]

This is still in the web archive (wayback machine), I won't link to it but it won't take much googling 

[ghostdancer1]

someone has uploaded a screenshot of it to imgur too...

[Stretlow]

3 hours ago, Michaels denim shorts said:

This is still in the web archive (wayback machine), I won't link to it but it won't take much googling 

What a funky little tool that is 

[maclauk]

9 hours ago, Mickball said:

Is the full, hi-res image available anywhere, or would one have to reconstruct it from the tiles on the web archive?

Once you work out the top left tile and the bottom right one it would be entirely possible to write a small script using wget to download them all. And then a short Python script to stitch them into one big image.

[Losing my hair]

3 minutes ago, maclauk said:

Once you work out the top left tile and the bottom right one it would be entirely possible to write a small script using wget to download them all. And then a short Python script to stitch them into one big image.

Will "Good morning, Sir. Welcome to the National Cheese Emporium!" work.

[musky]

6 minutes ago, maclauk said:

Once you work out the top left tile and the bottom right one it would be entirely possible to write a small script using wget to download them all. And then a short Python script to stitch them into one big image.

I think Outwit Hub and Hugin will accomplish both these tasks, but I can't actually try as my OS is now so antiquated neither of them now support it.

[maclauk]

2 minutes ago, musky said:

I think Outwit Hub and Hugin will accomplish both these tasks, but I can't actually try as my OS is now so antiquated neither of them now support it.

I'd never heard of those but they look as if they'd do the job. As someone who first learned to code on a ZX81 I'll stick with the scripts as it polishes up some ever rustier skills.

[Over40_MidLifeCrisis]

4 hours ago, Michaels denim shorts said:

This is still in the web archive (wayback machine), I won't link to it but it won't take much googling 

Which year is this actual pic from, 2015?

[Stretlow]

15 minutes ago, Over40_MidLifeCrisis said:

Which year is this actual pic from, 2015?

Yes (I can see my tent) 

[musky]

It's a completely different map, but in the absence of the How Big Is and Internazionale ones someone has provided a nice Glasto overlay to compare with your home town. Or wherever else you fancy.

http://ocean.gsp8181.co.uk/glasto/index.php?location=london uk

[Gnomicide]

Glastonbury map overlaid over Glastonbury.

 

I've not been well.

[musky]

18 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

Glastonbury map overlaid over Glastonbury.

 

I've not been well.

Wow, I never realised it was so big. It almost stretches from Gate D to Gate C!

[neil_d]

On 2017-5-4 at 8:53 PM, maclauk said:

Once you work out the top left tile and the bottom right one it would be entirely possible to write a small script using wget to download them all. And then a short Python script to stitch them into one big image.

Yeah, I'd say this is definitely possible.

And if someone were to do it using the highest zoom level they might (find a few squares missing, but) still end up with a 20,992 × 14,080 pixel, 300MB png file. Obviously, they couldn't share the picture publicly, but if previous posters on the thread were to PM and ask it might be able to be shared individually.