ArcGIS Field Maps, Data Sharing, and Projections: A Two-Part Journey in GIS 4043
This week’s lab was a double feature — part hands-on data collection with ArcGIS Field Maps and part deep dive into the world of map projections. The two labs fit together beautifully: the first focused on collecting and sharing spatial data in real time, while the second emphasized understanding and managing the coordinate systems that underlie all GIS work. Below, I’ll walk through my process, what I learned, and where I found the “aha!” moments along the way.
📱 Part 1: ArcGIS Field Maps & Data Sharing
The first part of the lab centered on creating an empty feature class, configuring it with domains, sharing it as a web layer, and then collecting data in the field using the ArcGIS Field Maps mobile app
ArcGIS Field Maps
Setting Up the Data Structure
I began by creating a new geodatabase in ArcGIS Pro and setting up a coded value domain for the “Condition” attribute. This step felt very procedural — define the domain, set up the fields, match the data types, and attach the domain to the correct field — but it paid off later. As I noted in my process summary, planning and organization really mattered here. Because I set up the domains carefully, everything worked smoothly when I started collecting data. No error messages, no mismatched fields — just smooth data entry.
Symbolizing for the Field
Before heading out, I customized the symbology for the Condition field (Excellent, Fair, Poor) using Unique Values and bright, field-friendly colors. This step seems minor, but when you’re outside trying to squint at your phone screen in the sun, clear symbols make a difference.
Sharing and Collecting
Next, I connected to the UWF ArcGIS Online organization, published my feature class as a hosted editable feature layer, and configured the web map for use in Field Maps. I also enabled attachments so I could include photos directly in the attribute data, which is especially useful for post-disaster assessments.
Out in the field, I collected several features, each with a condition value, notes, and a photo. Because my domains were set up correctly, the mobile experience was seamless. I could easily select the right category, take a quick photo, and submit the point.
Why This Matters: Hurricane Response
One of the reflection questions asked how ArcGIS Field Maps could help after a hurricane. The answer is clear: this technology allows for rapid, coordinated, real-time damage assessments. Crews could collect data on flooded areas, downed power lines, blocked roads, and infrastructure damage with GPS precision and attach photos and notes to each feature. Data would sync immediately to ArcGIS Online, allowing emergency operations centers to visualize damage as it happens. Even if cell service is down, offline maps can keep the work going until connectivity is restored. It’s a textbook example of how mobile GIS enhances situational awareness and speeds up recovery planning.
Sharing in Multiple Formats
To finish, I shared my data in three different formats:
-
ArcGIS Online Map – fully interactive and editable within a browser.
-
KML File for Google Earth – great for visualization and public sharing.
-
Map Package (MPK) – useful for other ArcGIS Pro users who need the full dataset and map.
Each format has different strengths and requirements.
Image coming soon. Blogger does not want to upload them today.
🧭 Part 2: Introduction to Projections
The second lab dove into coordinate systems and projections, a foundational GIS concept that often gets overlooked until something doesn’t line up correctly
Projections
.
Downloading Data & Exploring Coordinate Systems
I started by downloading Florida county boundary data (projected in Albers Conical Equal Area) and adding it to a new ArcGIS Pro project. By examining the metadata and map properties, I confirmed that both the layer and the map were in the Albers projection. This step set the baseline for the next exercises.
Projecting to UTM and State Plane
Using the Project tool, I reprojected the county boundary layer twice:
-
First to UTM Zone 16N (NAD 1983), applying the appropriate transformation.
-
Then to State Plane Florida North (FIPS 0903), which is commonly used in Florida for local analyses.
I created separate map views for each projection — Albers, UTM, and State Plane — and compared them visually. There were subtle differences: the UTM version looked slightly compacted and rotated counter-clockwise compared to Albers. The State Plane projection aligned closely but is optimized for local precision.
Image coming soon. Blogger does not want to upload them today.
Quantifying the Differences
The lab then had me calculate the area of four counties (Alachua, Escambia, Miami-Dade, and Polk) in each projection. The results showed only tiny numerical differences — not visually noticeable, but present when you look at the attribute table. These small discrepancies highlight why projections matter for accurate spatial analysis, even if your map “looks right” on screen.
✨ Key Takeaways
-
Preparation pays off: Careful domain setup in Field Maps prevented downstream issues.
-
Different formats serve different audiences: Map Packages are for ArcGIS Pro users, ArcGIS Online maps are interactive for organizations, and Google Earth KMLs are great for public sharing.
-
Projections matter: Even when differences are subtle, choosing the correct projection ensures spatial accuracy, especially for area calculations and overlay analysis.
-
Raster handling requires attention: Defining vs. projecting is a crucial distinction.
These two labs complemented each other well. The first showed how to collect and share data, and the second reminded me to handle that data responsibly in the spatial reference realm.
No comments:
Post a Comment