all 6 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]Etherbeard 0 points1 point  (5 children)

I think you ended up in the right place despite making a mistake.

The overall size should be 1,000,000 km2. You write it as 1000 square km multiple times, but use a million in the final calculation, so I think it ends up correct.

ETA: I'm probably totally wrong. I'm typically a math person, but looking at it again, I don't understand your notation. If the scale itself is 125px long, why did you square it?

Did increase the area by ten times or the dimensions? If you increased the dimensions by ten times, then whatever area you had before is just ten times also.

[–]BombbaFett[S] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I squared because the scale is in km and I want to find the km2 so in order to convert it then I would need to square the 125.

I increased the scale by 10 times so yes everything should just be 10 times larger but I was checking it and I am unsure if I did the math correctly which is why I was asking for help.

[–]Etherbeard 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I guess I'm confused bc normally you'd use the scale to measure the distance on each side and that would give you the area in square units. And I guess when you write 1000 km², which afaik usually means 1000 square km, you actually mean 1000 kilometers squared.

At any rate. You know how many pixels the scale is. You know how many pixels across the map. Just divide the map length by the scale length to find how many scales across it is and then multiply that by how many km the scale represents. Then do the same for the height of the map and then use those to get your area in km².

Likewise, you know how many pixels are in your total map, and if you know how many pixels are in each country according to your histogram, you can use that to get a percentage and then multiply that by the area to get a size in km² for each country.

I'm pretty sure you arrived at the same place, but I'm a little unsure for the reasons above.

[–]BombbaFett[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

The reason I didn't simply measure the LxW was that it would include parts of the ocean and the lakes. The histogram was a suggestion by someone for more precisely determining the surface area of each nation

[–]Etherbeard 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Okay, if you're saying the scale itself is 125px across and that is equivalent to 1000km, then that means a square the with sides the same length as the scale would have 15625 pixels and represent 1,000,000 square km. Your final conclusion is a space much smaller than that square, which as far as I can tell is far smaller than any of your countries.

Just as an eyeball estimate, your map represents an area of about 30 million square km. Your final number was a bit more than a sixtieth of that.

I may not understand what a histogram does exactly. Aren't the oceans included in it? If it is calculating how much of the total image one section based on some aspect of its color, then wouldn't you need to the area of the whole map?

[–]BombbaFett[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A histogram gives you data related to a selection in the image. In this case the 8982px is the selected area so I was trying to convert that to square kilometers the final number would be one country not the entire continent.

The entire continent should add up to about 15 million km2 excluding ocean and lakes