Jason Boggs
I wonder when they will change up the colors on the actual Slight Risk text. I see it's still green.
-
After witnessing the continued decrease of involvement in the SpotterNetwork staff in serving SN members with troubleshooting issues recently, I have unilaterally decided to terminate the relationship between SpotterNetwork's support and Stormtrack. I have witnessed multiple users unable to receive support weeks after initiating help threads on the forum. I find this lack of response from SpotterNetwork officials disappointing and a failure to hold up their end of the agreement that was made years ago, before I took over management of this site. In my opinion, having Stormtrack users sit and wait for so long to receive help on SpotterNetwork issues on the Stormtrack forums reflects poorly not only on SpotterNetwork, but on Stormtrack and (by association) me as well. Since the issue has not been satisfactorily addressed, I no longer wish for the Stormtrack forum to be associated with SpotterNetwork.
I apologize to those who continue to have issues with the service and continue to see their issues left unaddressed. Please understand that the connection between ST and SN was put in place long before I had any say over it. But now that I am the "captain of this ship," it is within my right (nay, duty) to make adjustments as I see necessary. Ending this relationship is such an adjustment.
For those who continue to need help, I recommend navigating a web browswer to SpotterNetwork's About page, and seeking the individuals listed on that page for all further inquiries about SpotterNetwork.
From this moment forward, the SpotterNetwork sub-forum has been hidden/deleted and there will be no assurance that any SpotterNetwork issues brought up in any of Stormtrack's other sub-forums will be addressed. Do not rely on Stormtrack for help with SpotterNetwork issues.
Sincerely, Jeff D.
New SPC Outlook Underlays
- Thread starter Michael Riedl
- Start date
Jesse Risley
Staff member
They've actually already explained this with a document that is linked on the site, and available here: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/misc/SPC_probotlk_info.html
While it has yet to be updated to reflect the change in outlook color schematics, it does a fairly good job of breaking down the outlooks for those who are not exactly weather aficionados.
I guess I'm not sure why they bothered to change it. Was there something wrong with the way it had been done before? It seemed pretty clear cut to me. I suppose filling in the regions of threat is an improvement of sorts, but the fact that the text within each filled region is the same color (just a different shade/value) makes it much harder to read. I suppose the legend makes up for that, but I still think the old way was pretty simple to read.
weskranz
EF0
I think it's a nice face-lift. The overlays are a good touch. One of these days they should make the map interactive with zoom capabilities.
DWest
EF1
I can agree with that - as it stands I'm not sure how useful the in-region text is with the key right below. Overall I think it's a positive change, but it will take some getting used to. Seeing slight risk as yellow isn't something most of us are accustomed to, I guess.
In addition I'm not sure how useful some of the overlays are, in particular "population"; it's hard to represent population accurately on a map of that resolution, and simply labeling the major cities seems to do the job ok. Counties / interstates were a good idea, though, since before without a third party rendering tool it was somewhat difficult to tell if your locale was included in some of the outlook regions.
Jason Foster
While I certainly hold NWS employees in a higher regard the many/most government workers...the bottomline is they are still government. They have to do work in order to justify their position to hold their job. I can't tell you how many folks here in DC know this technique and use it to their maximum advantage. Things like purposely changing something, just it doesn't work, so they can then spend lots of time fixing it.
While I'm not crazy about it either (load time significantly increased and awkward layout), I'm sure there is a work around.
Jake Orosi
EF4
From the perspective of a greenhorn who never had time to become accustomed to the now-"old style" SPC Outlooks:
On the web, the product looks sleek and more professional than the previous version, which frankly looked like it was composed in MS Paint. Data-wise, it contains the same information. The fact that a handy legend is included makes the "SLGT" labels redundant and unnecessary, but neither are they especially intrusive. The overlays are neat; but I find them all pretty useless with the exception of the county grid.
On my iPod, I'm subbed to the RSS feed for the Convective Outlooks and meso discussions. The RSS feed includes the new-style Categorical plot map sans overlays, and the text product for each outlook issued...which is really all that is necessary in that mobile format. The newer map with filled-in colors and the legend looks much better on the iPod screen than the previous style, so I approve of it. If you've got an RSS/blog reader or aggregator that you use (your browser probably has its own if you don't want to use a third party's), use these links:
Convective Outlooks:
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/spcacrss.xml
Mesoscale Discussions:
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/spcmdrss.xml
I find the improvement positive overall, though not earth-shatteringly so.
On the web, the product looks sleek and more professional than the previous version, which frankly looked like it was composed in MS Paint. Data-wise, it contains the same information. The fact that a handy legend is included makes the "SLGT" labels redundant and unnecessary, but neither are they especially intrusive. The overlays are neat; but I find them all pretty useless with the exception of the county grid.
On my iPod, I'm subbed to the RSS feed for the Convective Outlooks and meso discussions. The RSS feed includes the new-style Categorical plot map sans overlays, and the text product for each outlook issued...which is really all that is necessary in that mobile format. The newer map with filled-in colors and the legend looks much better on the iPod screen than the previous style, so I approve of it. If you've got an RSS/blog reader or aggregator that you use (your browser probably has its own if you don't want to use a third party's), use these links:
Convective Outlooks:
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/spcacrss.xml
Mesoscale Discussions:
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/spcmdrss.xml
I find the improvement positive overall, though not earth-shatteringly so.
I can't say an "upgrade" to this page surprises me. "New and fresh" is better than "old, even if it works" in this fast-paced world of competitiveness online. The government is as much a part of it as are corporations. Just check out how many times TWC has changed the look of their "Locals on the 8s" or how the on-screen scoreboards for any major sporting event on ABC, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, etc. change from season to season.
Jeff Hawkins
EF3
When the SPC upgraded their mesoanalysis page information and formats last year, I honestly felt like it was an upgrade, because the information wasn't just reformatted, it was made more easy to learn about and interpret.
Unlike that upgrade, this feels more like re-arranging the deck chairs...same info, different look, so I'm not entirely clear on what they were aiming at with this.
This link: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/misc/SPC_probotlk_info.html mentioned above ...is a document from 3/1/2010, well before this change, and reflects more the overall SPC team guidelines for determining a risk level, rather than exactly what they were going after with this format change.
Is there another more recent post that explains the rationale for this particular change, available?
Unlike that upgrade, this feels more like re-arranging the deck chairs...same info, different look, so I'm not entirely clear on what they were aiming at with this.
This link: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/misc/SPC_probotlk_info.html mentioned above ...is a document from 3/1/2010, well before this change, and reflects more the overall SPC team guidelines for determining a risk level, rather than exactly what they were going after with this format change.
Is there another more recent post that explains the rationale for this particular change, available?
Trey Thee
EF2
I agree. The outlooks were long overdue for an upgrade, this new system will take some time getting used to but I like it overall.
My biggest concern is do they have the server power to handle the additional demands that will be put on the system with these new graphics. The SPC site can get pretty damn slow on MDT and High risk days as it is now.
Michael Riedl
EF2
I don't know if adding this is going to make a monumental increase on their server load. It will still get bogged down on MDT and High risk days.
My biggest concern is the Regional and Local NWS sites going down on High Traffic days, considering they are the ones Issuing the warnings.
Tim Supinie
EF2
The five additional images used for the page (one for each of the overlays) are static, so they'll probably be cached by the web browser the first time you load them. After that, it's basically back to what the page was before, so I don't think it will be much additional work for the server.
W. Grant Dade
EF2
I love the new look. The only thing I would change is make the actual outlook the top layer on the graphic. When you add counties, roads, CWA… they cover up the actual outlook. You can still tell what it is but it is just not as clear. Other than that, I love it.
Karen Politte
EF5
I hate it. I just about had a fit yesterday when I checked the Day 1.
Now admittedly this may not mean much coming from someone who prefers "plain and simple" to "fancy and sleek", but I find the new maps very hard to read. All the colors seem much more samey, and it's harder to distinguish. Also the new elements of population, cities etc. seems really unnecessary and just confuses things quite frankly.
My 2c.
KP
Now admittedly this may not mean much coming from someone who prefers "plain and simple" to "fancy and sleek", but I find the new maps very hard to read. All the colors seem much more samey, and it's harder to distinguish. Also the new elements of population, cities etc. seems really unnecessary and just confuses things quite frankly.
My 2c.
KP
Mark Ellinwood
EF2
I'm alright with it, but one thing I don't like is the random white pixels that don't get filled in around the border lines that they draw... not sure how some of those pixels don't get filled in unless the software that does it is pretty crummy.
