well is a zone
cs and within
ne fireworks.
ill. fireworks,
viewing area.
xcided by the
ficult, so its
edge in this
of Narashino
t access, and
[a fireworks
e seen.
xcluded, and
| confirmed in
‚of 100 m, 120
map on the
seen well was
1 a scale of 1 -
ve policy by
hs taken from
y. The size of
Ny from 12X
experimental
was checked
rimental map
tival. The 13
es symbols in
ioned in their
fireworks can
not be seen.
ether or not
h other.
hey moved to
ie time at one
| in figure 5 is
eck were filled
thermore, the
took as many
VP
photographs as possible of fireworks and recorded the
time. Figure.6(a) shows a photograph from among
them. Figure.6(b) shows a photograph taken for the
same spot of figure.6(a) in the daytime. Table.1 shows
the data sheet. In table 1, the circle symbol is a correct,
the cross symbol is a fault and the triangle symbol is a
neutral. A neutral is a judgment which is interpreted
as a partial sight of the fireworks. From table 2 the
percentages of correct interpretation at the estimated
fireworks viewing area and the un-estimated fireworks
viewing area were 97 percent and 77 percent, provided
that the triangle symbol is counted of 0.5 marks per
one mark.
Judgment at the un-estimated fireworks viewing area
had less reliability than at the estimated area, because
the result of photo interpretation is information of
central projection but the result confirmed on the
ground by students is not information of central
projection. Information of central projection is
information seen from one spot in the sky, but
information checked by students is information
regarding the extent of the fireworks. These facts can
be seen in table.2, because the number of cross symbols
in the cross column in the section of the un-estimated
fireworks viewing area is 0 percent. In table 2, the
results of verification were highly reliable.
Table.1 Data sheet on verihication of reliability
Observation persons’ names 4 squads Sat.30 July,1995
Estimated fireworks Un-estimated fireworks
Check | Verified viewing area Consid- viewing area Consid-
point | time correct fault eration fault correct eration
(can see) | (can not see) (can see) | (can not see)
4 © ; Oo
| 7:50pm oO 1) Q 2)
1 Oo o
oO O
Oo A
Oo A
8:20pm o ^
4 O A
| ~ O A 3)
2 Oo ^
Oo A
8:27pm © A
Oo A
L. | Oo &
4 ^ O
|| 8:30pm A 4) Oo 5)
3 A ©
A ©
LE
1)Good visibility
2)Poor visibility owing to the trees
3)Could see upper partial sight of fireworks but could not see lower partial sight of
fireworks owing to the houses and trees
4)Could not see lower partial sight of fireworks
S)Poor visibility owing to the houses and trees
307
(a) Photograph taken when verification of reliability
was made
(b) The place in the above photograph(a) in the
daytime
Fig.6 Fireworks and surrounding view at a check
point (check point)
4.5 Final fireworks viewing area map
The results of verification on the experimental map
were highly reliable, so that the final map was drawn
based on the experimental map. A map drawn on a
scale of 1 to 10,000, the size being about 42cm X 30cm,
was used because a map drawn on a scale of 1 to 2,500,
the size being about 90cm X 60cm,is bulky to carry
about. The map that only showed the estimated
fireworks viewing area is unattractive and posed some
questions, for example, why is the area indicated as an
area not for fireworks viewing, when it does not
recognize the existence of structures which obstruct the
view, or much information such as green tracts of land,
rivers, public service, cemetery etc was shown in the
map. Hereby, a clear, understandable and portable
map was made. Figure.7 shows the final fireworks
viewing area map.
5. Conclusion
This paper drew up the fireworks viewing area map as
the first thematic map in Japan. This method was
confirmed as an effective drawing-up method. We will
continue to make fireworks viewing area maps
throughout the country. Furthermore, this method can
be applied in variousways in fields such as urban view
planning etc.
International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Vol. XXXI, Part B5. Vienna 1996
