Vector Analysis Lab

 

This lab was generally pretty easy to get through, but it offered new challenges like creating my own process summary and making a map that had some complex elements to it. Despite this, I noticed that I was able to problem-solve better and remember more things about how to make maps than I did in the past two map labs. One issue I learned how to fix was how to save new attribute table fields when ArcGIS Pro disables the save button. The inset map was difficult to figure out because I had to relearn how to zoom to scale within the map frame in order to show the state of Mississippi. Additionally, I had to be creative with representing the campsites on the inset map before I realized that I could insert a point over the inset map on the layout tab. I also learned how to remove layer headers in the legend to reduce clutter. I detailed all of these solutions in my process summary, which is something I have not done in the past. Both parts of this lab dealt a lot with attribute table manipulation and geoprocessing tools. Although manipulating the attribute tables was annoying and nerve-wracking at times, I got the hang of it pretty quickly and grew a fondness for it. I really liked the cool functions I was able to perform with geoprocessing tools like buffers and unions. I thought the overall concept of this map was interesting. Finding potential campsites that don't conflict with conservation areas and sorting them according to the area is of interest to me. I chose to represent the campsites based on their percentage of the total area of potential sites. I colored them with a customized graduated color scheme and split the sites into three equal interval classes. The lighter the color, the smaller the percentage of the total area. The darker the color, the larger the percentage is of the total area. 

Georeferencing and Data Quality Lab

 

This lab was a challenging experience for me. Although the ArcGIS Collector map isn't depicted here, it was my first time creating a database and collecting data with it. That part of the lab was quite rewarding and I loved seeing my finished product at the end. The Projections portion of the lab is where most of my time went. The beginning steps were pretty straightforward, especially because of the mini-lab I did in Dr. Hu's GIS4043 class. When it came to filling in the area table for each selected county in each projection (shown in the image above), I was a bit anxious about having to calculate the area for each individual cell. I was pleasantly surprised to learn a new and creative method for getting area information in GIS. The most difficult part of this entire lab for me was making the map. Making the map with very little guidelines and for the first time when I was truly on my own was very daunting. I struggled with removing some extraneous information from the legend and formatting the individual map layouts the most. I went back to the Cartography Lab instructions in order to relearn how to do these things and review the essential map elements. Overall, though, I think this portion of the lab really solidified my understanding of cartography from the last lab. The most interesting part of the projections lab was seeing the noticeable differences in each projection. This lab taught me how important it is to keep a consistent projection for comparative data analysis.