This week we had a first try on GIS mapping, and I had exceptional fun when playing with the David Rumsey Map Collection georeferencer. (This is a link to the map, and this is the overlay result) However, while it did prove to be entertaining, I would like to question whether it makes a real difference in the field of Digital Humanities.
Did this process change your understanding of the spatial DH projects you explored earlier?
First of all, it did not help me understand more about geospatial humanities. Sure, I pinned a more detailed map onto the dull, original map, which made it a lot easier for viewers to understand what’s going on in each state of the US. However, it works more like a travel pamphlet than a tool for true scholarly use, which only provides a fun way of viewing the US map, but no usable data had been conveyed in this process, not to mention the slight distortions that happened during the mapping process.
Examine the This Map page, what formats can you access the map you rectified in?
What surprised me was the number of formats that I can access. It is super cool to see my rectified map in 3D version – on a real globe rather than flat, black – and- white planes. The 3D mode also made me realize my rectified map was in a slightly wrong direction, since Mexico on the map provided would not fit onto the globe. The swiping and spyglass functions are also extraordinary. These partly made me understood how the previous students created their own final projects, in which these two functions are of frequent use.
Are there problems with georeferencing that you should consider?
There are plenty of problems that emerged in the process. First, it is difficult to exactly reference the provided map onto the world map, since only a few points are selected as anchors. Furthermore, the maps themselves may be inaccurate, for example my map was very mistaken on its depiction of the US-Mexican border.