Author: Art Kalinski

Oblique Imagery Online a Significant Game Changer for Federal Agencies

By Art Kalinski, GISP

A new technology service has just been initiated that may affect almost every federal employee who needs to view high resolution oblique imagery in the United States and key locations around the world. This service is a joint effort between Pictometry International and defense partners.

First, in full disclosure, I’m a consultant for Pictometry. I debated if I should write this article, have someone else write it or leave it alone. Discussing it with my editor we decided that it was too timely and important not to cover and I was clearly the best person to do the article because of my first hand experience and knowledge of the topic. I’ll try my best not to sound like a commercial but I will present you with the facts as I know them.

To put this article in context I want to share by background with those of you not familiar with it. I learned about GIS in the mid eighties when I was tasked to do a base closure study for the Navy including the desire to close 10-20 percent of the Naval Reserve Centers nation-wide. The reserve centers were the most challenging because each required a detailed analysis of reservist assignment, travel and per diem costs for centers that were closed. Congressional pressure to not close facilities in local districts was a significant issue. Time was very tight and traditional paper map analysis would have been impossible until I learned about GIS. GIS permitted me to do ring studies of over 100 reserve centers involving 30,000 reservists very quickly and very accurately.

GIS proved to be such a powerful technology that I earned a Masters degree in GIS upon retirement from the Navy. I then joined the Atlanta Regional Commission as its GIS Manager for over 14 years. During my tenure we set up an ESRI ArcView Learning Center and taught over 1000 students during the 8 years of operation. One disappointment over those years is that even though we would occasionally get a police officer or firefighter through the class I never felt that GIS gained any strong traction with first responders. I got the feeling that it was just too hard and no one got proficient enough to use it in emergency situations.

Then everything changed. In 2006 we were exposed to a new technology that provided high resolution oblique imagery that was geo-referenced and very accurately measurable. It was extremely easy to use, could be overlaid with our GIS data and provided a visual operational picture that was not matched by even high resolution ortho imagery. (See my GSS column “The Whys of Oblique Imagery” April 8, 2008 for a scientific explanation why oblique imagery has proved to be so effective compared to using only ortho imagery.)

Police and firefighters took to it instantly. The technology was such an improvement over traditional GIS data with ortho imagery that we were seeing measureable improvements in the effectiveness of firefighters and other first responders.

The technology was being used by firefighters to preplan their action on the way to fires. The common operational picture permitted them to view and measure all aspects of their attack on a fire including access to the site, measuring the lengths of needed fire hoses and even measuring the heights of buildings to determine the lengths of ladders that would be needed. It was so effective and easy to use that over the past two years of keeping statistics one large county determined that they have reduced the attack time on a typical fire by 60-90 seconds. Police SWAT teams and 911 Call Centers also experienced similar success and believe that they have saved lives in the process.

The technology took root and soon most counties in the region were using it. It had an unprecedented impact on GIS. Most counties experienced a 10 to 20 fold increase in GIS usage in the more user friendly and understandable oblique environment.

After two years of hands-on experience with Pictometry, I was approached by them to promote and manage military projects. I was surprised the technology was not already used by the military and jumped at the chance to help. The opportunity to put the technology in the hands of the military and first responders means much more to me than just a job. While I was still on active duty I had the painful task of presenting the Flag on three separate occasions to family members of sailors lost in the line of duty. I can tell you first hand that presenting the flag to parents or young family members is one of those life changing moments that you never forget. So when Pictometry presented me with the opportunity to perhaps in some small way minimize the potential loss of yet another service member I was thankful for the opportunity. I jumped at the opportunity and feel privileged to be able to contribute and help those that may be in harms way.

What I soon learned is that the technology was very difficult for federal agencies to acquire. This difficulty stemmed from the business model used by Pictometry, flying and selling counties. In the early days, Pictometry would fly and sell imagery county by county. This worked extremely well for local governments, even those with limited budgets. The imagery was very cost effective and was a significant boon to tax assessors and first responders. So effective was this effort that their customer base includes 90% of the US Urban Areas. Overseas users have been equally impressed with partners operating in 137 countries and territories. Overseas users have been equally impressed with major cities in over 142 countries imaged.

This business model had a serious limitation for state and federal customers since it was very difficult to scale up to state and federal levels. No one had budgets to buy hundreds of counties let alone the entire country. I remember an early visit to a national bureau that clearly highlighted the problem. Most agencies don’t have budgets to buy imagery of the entire country. They can never predict where the next security event or emergency will occur and have to respond anywhere instantly. What they needed was access to all the imagery on an as-needed basis. This is what IOD (Intelligence-on-Demand) provides.

IOD is a service based on the successful online commercial service that Pictometry has been providing to the civilian sector for over a year, called Pictometry Online (POL). The POL service provides a variety of solutions, from real estate to engineering to golf. Large insurance companies use it as well as hundreds of roofing companies that can view and measure roofs and provide estimates to customers during their initial phone request.

Below is an example of how the Pictometry imagery differs from other imagery sites that only show ortho imagery. Although the straight down view shows Big Ben, it’s really difficult to make it out in this “ortho view.” The IOD image shows a very recognizable oblique view of Big Ben and the users can view it from five directions, north, south, east, west and straight down. Additionally since all historic imagery is also on file many locations will have several years of imagery that can be selected to show changes over time.

But these are not just “pretty pictures.” As the name Pictometry implies the images are metric – each pixel is fully geo-referenced. Users can easily overlay GIS data and perform rapid on-screen measurements of objects in the image with little to no training. Measurements such as length, area, ground elevation, lat/long, bearing, and locations can be made with the simple click of a mouse. And unique to oblique imagery, the height of objects can also be measured without the need to do stereo analysis – just click on the base of the object and drag upward to measure the height.

Note that even thin vertical features such as whip antennas, guy wires, stanchions and even signal flag halyards are visible in this sample image of the USS Wisconsin on historic display in Norfolk, Virginia.

The natural question is how IOD differs from the commercial access imagery sites. First, Bing Maps (previously Microsoft Virtual Earth), which uses Pictometry images, only has viewing capability — users cannot make measurements nor can they overlay GIS data layers or export annotated images. There are also limitations of image quality and coverage. Additionally, this system is accessed over non-secure HTML connections at a commercial site, meaning it is easy for a third party to view where a federal user may be paying special attention – a big issue for many federal customers.

IOD was set up to address many of these limitations. The IOD team has installed 2-petabytes worth of secure server storage to provide the entire Pictometry image library to federal users via a trusted cloud through secure but unclassified (SBU) access. And since the data center is being built in a SCIF, it is possible to provide higher classification access via SIPRnet or JWICS, should a customer require it. The additional advantage of operating in a secure environment is that a federal customer could initiate a sensitive or secure image collection and make it available through the same system as all of the commercial data.

The secure sites permit users to view all the imagery, overlay GIS data, perform accurate measurements, annotate images and export those annotated images to other users. This will be especially important in responding to natural disasters such as hurricanes since the Pictometry capture and processing technology is so rapid that Pictometry was able to provide geo-referenced imagery to FEMA a day after Hurricane Ike hit Galveston, Texas.

Pictometry is now testing a real time capability to download the geo-referenced imagery from aircraft directed from the ground.

Another service that can be ordered online is the automated generation of reflective surface 3D models. These models have been used to help determine volume of debris fields to more sophisticated flight simulator databases that are not only photo-realistic but measurable and photo-accurate. This is an especially important factor for use in tactical planning and mission rehearsal.

But the key decision factor is cost. This is where IOD solves several cost issues by charging an unusually low monthly per seat license. As a secure web service IOD answers several issues that have been important to many federal agencies including NGA. Since the secure servers house the imagery with remote back up, agencies eliminate the need for additional hardware and software. All users need is a URL. This imagery also satisfies the congressional mandate to save money by taking advantage of commercial off-the-shelf products (COP).

Most important to me is that this entire effort has led to testing of Pictometry cameras in military aircraft. Hopefully this will put the technology in the hands of people who need it the most, troupes in-theater, domestic security planners and first responders. As the image libraries expand and are updated they will be instantly available to all designated federal users.

The grand unveiling of IOD will be this month at GEOINT 2009 in San Antonio. To learn more see the Pictometry booth or contact Pictometry. My experience with this technology in the Atlanta region was an eye opener. Since it was very easy to use GIS usage jumped 10-20 fold and the most dramatic beneficiaries were first responders. If my Atlanta experience is any indicator, this technology will be a “game changer” for many Federal agencies. Most important, I know this service and technology is going to save lives.

Earlier this month I attended the Defense Installation GeoSpatial Information and Services (IGI&S) conference in Dallas. Although not a large conference, it is tightly focused and aimed directly at the GIS community that supports military installations. The conferences were initially started by the Air Force, but attendance by other branches has grown since they all have common issues and many have joint chains of command. The first keynote speaker was Lora Muchmore, director of Business Enterprise Integration, Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Installations and Environment. She addressed the historic difficulty that DOD had keeping track of buildings, equipment, and personnel. The problem was exacerbated because each branch had their own inventory systems that were not interoperable with systems of other branches. Mrs. Muchmore concluded by emphasizing the increasingly important role that IGI&S is playing to improve the Department’s real property inventory, literally transforming the way resource and management decisions are made at the highest levels.

David LaBranche, the Defense Installation Spatial Data Infrastucture (DISDI) program manager, addressed how DISDI is working with the National GeoSpatial Intelligence Agency (NGA) to put IGI&S data and systems in place that are complimentary but of course different from intelligence community needs. They are working toward interoperability between the joint services and encouraging greater use of unclassified, shared, off-the-shelf products to build “installation situational awareness” without the expense of custom products and services.

The complexity of joint bases, base realignments and closures (BRAC), environmental issues, and interrelated activities with other federal agencies such as Department of Homeland Security (DHS), DEA, CDC and others highlighted the need for interoperability and shared spatial data. However, the opposite has occurred as systems grew in size and complexity. So the overarching theme of the conference was getting back to basics with standards and consistent base-to-base data and systems.

This concept of snapping back to where we started reminded me of a dysfunctional ship that I was assigned to early in my Navy career. The ship was a mess with poor morale, poor performance, and a very unhappy crew. A new CO arrived who made no immediate changes but instead carefully studied the ship for two months. He then called us officers together in the wardroom and gave us a very simple order. He told everyone to get a copy of the ship’s SORM, read it and put each division and department back in line with it. The SORM stands for Standard Organization and Regulations of the U.S. Navy. The long standing but continuously updated Navy manual is a guide that clearly identifies how a Navy ship should be organized and operated. It was created through decades of lessons learned and practical experience. Our new CO explained how any organization will morph over time away from it roots. Sometimes the changes grow out of operational necessity and some changes are driven by the personalities and talents of crew members. Regardless of the source, these changes can ultimately twist the organization into dysfunction.

As a junior officer, I was somewhat skeptical that this would have any major effect but I was wrong. Within three months the ship was functioning like a fine watch and there was actually harmony in the wardroom and among the crew. Of course this wasn’t the only change; the CO was a very gifted and uplifting leader with a superb memory. In that same three month period, through his “management by walking around” he learned the name, home town and family situation of every member of the 300 man crew. The CO became so respected and admired that eventually any crewmember would walk off a cliff for him. Getting back to the SORM roots certainly helped.

Many of the conference sessions addressed the same themes of interoperability and cleaning up the basics. The Marine Corps GeoFidelis program was highlighted by David LaBranche as a model, built with a focus on interoperability while also addressing the institutional issues of data handling and organization. Frances Railey, the GeoFidelis GIO, explained the details of the Marine Corps system and how it was designed to meet customer needs including a very detailed Data Access & Release Guide. Peter Len, the Gi&S manager for the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Pacific, explained the unique challenges he faces with facilities scattered across the Pacific including Guam and the Marianas. He discussed how GIS was used for encroachment planning and other base management issues.

The conference also included 22 vendors who demonstrated new products and services that also addressed the conference themes of interoperability. AutoDesk, which is one of the leaders in BIM modeling, had personnel demonstrating new tools that bridge the gap between CAD and GIS into the BIM environment. Bentley, another leader in BIM modeling, demonstrated BIM solutions that addressed life cycle facility management including energy and lighting. Their OGC compliant systems work with many different BIM model formats. NGA staffers demonstrated Palanterra, a Google-like online system used by emergency management people such as DHS for special event planning and response.

Woolpert demonstrated a new capability that can quickly create 3D building interior models from video clips taken from different view angles. I’ve seen this done with laser point clouds but this was the first time I saw video used to build 3D models. Kaya explained their GIS services including web engineering applications for facility and installation management as well as tools to build real property master plans. Pictometry demonstrated a new image service that will be launched this summer. Through the web service federal users will be able to view or download all Pictometry imagery, both ortho and oblique views, through secure portals. The service will be very affordable because imagery is accessed only when and where needed. This should be a boon for emergency responders.

ERDAS demonstrated web services that reduce a series of complex image/spatial analysis functions to simple and intuitive user tools and products. This screen capture below is an example intended for use by a tank commander. In one operation this service combines slope data, image analysis vegetation data, and feature data to build “drive/no drive” zones. This is very similar to work many of you have done using ESRI’s Model Builder with Spatial Analyst, but the ERDAS system is faster and takes full advantage of their 30 years experience in image analysis. “Wiping” the image shows the drive/no drive areas over a topo map.

The one nagging concern I had that seemed to need more attention was emergency preparedness. When I addressed the topic with attendees and presenters they talked about how their IT people had remote backup systems for installation data and how backups occurred regularly. I have this little gut twitch that occurs when I hear that IT people are backing up my data. Please take this first hand experience from someone who almost lost 10 years of GIS data because of an administrative error.

In a previous assignment our agency had a catastrophic server farm failure that resulted in the total loss of our entire SDE database. Backup? There was no backup. Some IT personnel view GIS data, especially imagery, as a huge data set that doesn’t need to be backed up often, if at all. They don’t see GIS data in the same light as financial data and may treat it differently so, through a misunderstanding, the IT people were not backing up the SDE database.

Luckily, a year before the loss, we placed all our GIS data and imagery on portable hard drives as part of our portable emergency GIS we set up in support of regional disaster preparedness and mutual aid. One set of those hard drives was in our emergency GIS locker in our office; the other set was 25 miles away in a secure location (see my January 2008 Geointelligence Insider column, What Can You Do for Your Country). At the risk of sounding like a broken record, or for those of you born in the post-vinyl period, “a continuously looping file,” I say what many others have said: “back up your data.”

Stepping down from my soap box, I can say that this conference was an exceptional conference that was rich in information and not overwhelming like some of our mega-conferences. For the vendors many good leads were generated and for the participants a lot of useful information was presented.

Was the FGDC Mortgage Crisis Meeting a Silver Lining on a Huge Cloud?

By Art Kalinski, GISP

On May 7, I attended a special meeting addressing the mortgage crisis hosted by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO). The purpose of the day long meeting was to discuss the use of land parcel data in managing mortgage related issues. The meeting focused on how GIS can monitor and manage these issues and to get feedback from leaders on which specific data elements are important to the mortgage industry and its financial oversight. The meeting was held at the American Institute of Architects Building in Washington, D.C.

The participants included representatives from banking, finance, credit, and mortgage firms as well as members of federal regulatory agencies. Also present were GIS professionals, private sector solution providers, and land parcel data producers. The meeting was opened by Dr. David Moyer, the meeting facilitator; Mike Howell, OMB and vice chair of the FGDC Steering Committee; Bob Ader, co-chair of the FGDC Cadastral Committee; and Dr. Josephine Lim, president of the IAAO.

Key presenters in the morning sessions were Anne Hale Miglarese of Booz Allen Hamilton, the chair of the National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC); Dr. Dave Cowen, a leading GIS educator; and Dr. Nancy von Meyer who has worked on cadastral issues for over 20 years, including her current work for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

According to the presenters, some analysts and GIS professionals saw the mortgage crisis coming but there was also a lot of “whistling past the grave yard,” as people hoped that the trend would not turn into a crisis. The rise in distressed mortgages, foreclosures, and decreasing real estate values were visible long before the crisis became a crisis. Key to monitoring the issues was good parcel level data. Unfortunately, even though we have high tech tools such as GIS, there are institutional barriers that limited the effectiveness of those tools. There was a lack of consistency and interoperability of key datasets at a national level.

I personally experienced two such frustrations related to the post office and to the census. When I first joined the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) as the GIS Manager in 1993, I learned that ARC published zip code maps as a service to the regions’ economic development offices. My response was “why don’t they get them from the post office?” After all, during my graduate work at the University of North Carolina we constantly used zip code marketing data for site selection and trade area analysis. I assumed that the zip code polygons came from the source, the U.S. Postal Service. I was wrong.

In the pre-GIS age, when zip codes were created, the purpose was to build delivery routes not defined polygons. As a result, the zip code boundary files we use are very fuzzy and the polygons only approximate boundaries. I was so incredulous, that I personally drove up one major road in Cobb County to conduct my own survey. What I saw were businesses in one long block on the same side of the street that had alternating zip codes as one progressed up the street. I was told that this happened because the business where given a choice of having a Marietta city address or a Kennesaw city address. This, of course, is one example of one street in one county, but my understanding is that this is a system wide issue. Even today the Postal Service doesn’t publish zip code maps but instead refers users to commercial vendors who create zip code maps. Of course these commercial maps come with disclaimers regarding the validity and positional accuracy of the data.

The second frustration was helping with the U.S. Census 2000 Local Update of Street Addresses (LUCA). Under this census program, local talent was used to update TIGER street data and addresses. The key limitation was that we all had to sign confidentiality agreements that any data collected and any data sets that were enhanced with this collection effort would also be confidential. That meant that if I sent staff to a new neighborhood and identified new streets and news addresses, not even houses, just address locations, that information was confidential and if I used the information to update our massive ARC street centerline database that file also became confidential.

I could then send the same people out on a different day to the same location to collect the same data but if the data collection was not in the name of LUCA, it was not confidential and we could use it. Yes, I fully appreciate privacy but the mere existence of a street address tells you nothing about the parcel or the building, if there is one, or even the inhabitants, if there are any. In fact, most of this data in even greater detail is already available from commercial sources. These are just two examples that hurt data collection and interoperability, but there are more when it comes to parcel level data. Now I’m about as conservative as one gets, but this silliness in the name of privacy defies common sense and is an example of how we twist ourselves into knots to our own detriment.

The afternoon sessions were facilitated by David Stage of the FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee, Susan Marlow of Smart Data Strategies, and Roger Clark of IAAO. The meeting focused on obtaining feedback from users in the mortgage industry as to specific data they need to do their job effectively. The list of data elements included factors that one would expect. There was a large list related to the property descriptions, such as lot and building size, construction — several attendees highlighted the need for street level or oblique imagery of each property, and annotation of the condition of improvements. George Donattelo of IAAO indicated that these were especially needed if IAAO AVM and Mass Appraisal Standards are used. Financial factors included the type of mortgage, equity, and terms of the mortgage. Geospatial factors such as nearness to water, flood plains, neighborhood comparable appraisals, demographics, and regional economic factors such as employment levels added even more complexity to the analysis.

The discussions all pointed to the need for timely analysis using comprehensive data. We know that spatial analysis of all factors, perhaps with regression analysis, could help with future forecasting, but analysts need data that is detailed, accurate, and most importantly, consistent. There was a general consensus that just a small portion of the rescue funds should be devoted to creation of comprehensive data collection efforts. All agreed that this should be the message from this meeting to our leaders.

I’m hoping that this economic crisis will open everyone’s eyes to the need for consistent and comprehensive data if government is going to insert itself into the market. Homer Simpson one stated: “Beer, the cause of and solution to life’s problems.” … Dare I substitute “government” for “beer?” Maybe with superb data and competent analysis we can look back on this crisis with open eyes and not repeat our mistakes. Perhaps the realization that we need good data and GIS analysis will be the silver lining.

For additional information, please contact Don Buhler, Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, [email protected], (202) 452-7781. The meeting details are posted on the Cadastral Subcommittee’s website at www.nationalcad.org.

Will Pecha Kucha Rescue Us?

By Art Kalinski, GISP

Over the past year I’ve attended over a dozen GIS related conferences and sat through over a hundred presentations, most of them PowerPoint.  Just like the Dilbert cartoon below I’ve reached my limit of poor PowerPoint presentations and I feel compelled to get on my soap box.

It’s been years since PowerPoint made its entrance but over the past year I still found myself suffering through absolutely horrible presentations. Several years ago there was a Dilbert cartoon in which Dilbert was explaining his side number 397. An audience member, who was actually paying attention, could take it no more and with a scream passed out.  Wally, who had been sleeping, examined him and declared “PowerPoint Poisoning!”  This may be funny but it strikes too close to reality.

Over the past year, I’ve attended more than a dozen GIS-related conferences and watched at least a hundred presentations, most of which were conducted in Microsoft PowerPoint. It’s been years since this now-ubiquitous software made its entrance, yet I still find myself suffering through absolutely horrible presentations. PowerPoint has made slide creation so easy that neurotic presenters with no skills, no taste, and no judgment are free to make us squirm in our seats. I’ve finally reached my limit, and I feel compelled to get on my soapbox.

First, a little history from an old guy who did presentations in the early eighties the hard way: with a grease pencil on overhead projector glass. In the late eighties I was lucky enough to be at a command where the graphics department could create professional-looking transparencies or 35-millimeter slides. The slides looked good, but because of the cost and hassle involved, presenters thought through their points carefully and used the slides sparingly.

In the early nineties, Harvard Graphics and PowerPoint hit the streets along with LCD projectors, and what should have been a wonderful tool quickly became a curse to many. Edward Tufte, the well-known author and Yale professor of information design, railed against PowerPoint. He used the famous 1869 graphic by Charles Joseph Minard of Napoleon’s march to Moscow as a superb example of the right way to communicate data graphically. This graph is still considered the single best example of elegant simplicity in using a map to display spatial and temporal data.

That’s how it was done in olden times: slow, deliberate, and thoroughly thought out. PowerPoint has facilitated the exact opposite behavior, with legions of presenters using the high-tech tool as a toy. I remember sitting thorough a presentation given by a senior executive of a major power company in Georgia. It was about a year after Microsoft added sound effects and the bullet fly-in feature to PowerPoint, and this presenter had each bullet fly in with a unique animation and sound effect. After a few minutes, no one was paying attention to the content; the audience chuckled and murmured, trying to predict which effect would come next. The only thing that presenter was missing was a big red nose and floppy shoes.

Worth a Thousand Words

In the GIS community, we are especially lucky, because most of our content is a graphic representation of spatial data. I think that’s what attracted me to GIS — its graphic visual nature. In GIS classes I’ve taught, I frequently pointed to a universal human characteristic: our learning, memory, and perception are very much graphically oriented. As an example, I cited the work of scientists who determined that the average person has almost 200,000 discrete human faces in their mental database. That’s pretty amazing, considering the relatively minor differences between faces; we have such discerning powers of observation that even Hollywood impersonators can’t fool most viewers. Of the thousands of Elvis impersonators, many come close to the real thing, but I have yet to see one that’s spot-on.

So I encourage people to take advantage of that human trait and use graphs, maps, imagery, and photos — not text — as visuals in their communication. Most PowerPoint trainers recommend using very little text, and limiting a presentation to no more than 35 slides and no more that 25 words on any given slide. They also caution to never, ever read the slides aloud. The slides are supposed to enhance the presenter’s presentation, not replace the presenter. My feeling about any presenter that reads his slides aloud is: Save yourself the trip! Stay home and just e-mail me your PowerPoint.

Good Tools, Bad Results

One problem with computers is that anyone can produce content that is technically perfect, such as documents, maps, or slides. But technically nice lines and fonts don’t guarantee a good-looking or effective end result. I learned that when I was the GIS Manager for the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC). In the mid-nineties we started publishing our GIS data on CD so our ARC users could create their own maps. The results were some of the worst maps I’ve ever seen. We quickly learned that when wielded by someone with no cartographic or artistic skills, even sophisticated GIS tools could result in horrid presentations.

The same held true for Internet projects. In the early years of the Web, the new technology was difficult to master quickly, so we hired a computer firm specializing in Web site creation. I remember asking the company owner about the challenge of finding good HTML programmers. He surprised me with his answer: it was relatively easy to find programmers, but he couldn’t teach them how to be artists and create content that looked good. He said it was easier to start by hiring good artists, and then teach them the programming skills needed to create Web sites.

And that’s the problem with PowerPoint: Learning the software doesn’t guarantee good presentations. In addition to knowledge of the software, good presentations require artistic talent, a command of the material, and exceptionally good judgment as to how to communicate with your audience.

I think that many people who overdo PowerPoint do it out of insecurity; they want to show everyone how complicated their job is, and how much stuff they handle. While I was at ARC, I tried countless times to convince our planners that more is less. Frequently they would conduct slide shows containing 80 to 90 slides, with many slides containing more than 100 words each. When these “planning shows” were scheduled, you could see the look of dread on the faces of our board members. The old “I just got a silent-ring cell phone call and I have to leave the room” trick was used frequently.

Trimming the Fat

Thankfully, some of these problems have been partially addressed. Good-looking, interactive GIS maps can now be created using ESRI’s MapPublisher, TerraGo’s GeoPDF, or some of the Adobe PDF map formats. All permit the preservation of color schemes, fonts, line widths, symbology, and other cartographic elements in the interactive environments.

Many companies and conference organizers try to improve the artistic aspect of PowerPoint presentations by requiring presenters to use a standard conference template. But that only standardizes the look, without affecting the content or the way it’s delivered. Now, there’s finally hope that tediously long presentations may get reined in as well.

There is a relatively new trend you’ve probably heard of called Pecha Kucha (Japanese for “chitchat”). Many pronounce it the way it looks, although the proper pronunciation is “peh chach ka.” This patented presentation method was started by architects Mark Dytham and Astrid Klein. While working in Japan, they would hold shows for young designers. Since they wanted to give many designers the opportunity to show their work, they developed a fast-paced format that limited each presenter to 20 slides and only 20 seconds per slide. The end result was a short presentation: just six minutes and forty seconds.

Think about the ramifications of this. Just like a “thirty-second elevator pitch,” presenters had to really think through their presentations and distill their material down to only the key points. Currently, most conferences give presenters twenty minutes, plus another five to ten minutes for questions. With a seven-minute limit per session, there can be more time for questions, or for more presentations. The trend is spreading like wildfire: Autodesk is hosting Pecha Kucha nights during conferences, and Bentley and some universities are doing the same. ESRI has tested the format at some local conferences, and the 2009 Annual URISA Conference will have a Pecha Kucha night that I’m looking forward to participating in. My current PowerPoints have fewer than thirty-five slides, and fewer than forty words total, but I’m working to whittle that number down to twenty.

If you want to learn more, check Google or YouTube, which have many examples to choose from. I promised myself that every time I’m subjected to a poor PowerPoint presentation, I’m going to give the presenter a copy of this article. Maybe you could do the same, and we can collectively raise the bar and see fewer bad presentations in the coming year.

Well, it’s time to get off the soapbox. So, if you aren’t neurotic, and you’re confident with your knowledge and position, try giving your audience more by giving them less — adopt Pecha Kucha and help cure PowerPoint Poisoning.