Did this process change your understanding of the spatial DH projects you explored earlier?
I think the georeferencing process made the spatial DH projects that I saw in class a little less impressive because of how simple the georeferencing process was. I still think they’re really impressive, I just think that some of the impressiveness shifted from the spatial DH projects and landed on georeferencing. Georeferencing seems so simple that I can understand the basics of it after just trying it one time and yet it is such a powerful tool.
Examine the This Map page, what formats can you access the map you rectified in?
You can access the image of the map, Turkei und Griechenland, in an IIIF viewer and also a JSON file with the map info.
What possibilities do you see once you have a georectified map? What would be the next steps?
I can see how the georectified map lines up with the modern-day map somewhat accurately. I think the next steps would be to find other maps by the same people or from the same time period and location and put them all together using georeferencing to cover as large of an area as possible.
Are there problems with georeferencing that you should consider?
One problem that I came across was that many of the old maps that were given looked so dissimilar to a modern-day map that I couldn’t even find the same points on the modern map. To be honest, I have a hard time believing all of the “maps” that were given were even maps.
What research questions or areas would this method NOT be appropriate for?
Georeferencing would not be appropriate for maps that require near-exact accuracy, at least the georeferencing on this website. I think that much more precise tools would be needed to produce a more accurate result. I will note that it is possible to have a very accurate result, but you would need to add a ton of points across both maps which would be very tedious.
