Thursday, September 15, 2011

A new user's impressions of Madison's B-cycle program

Here in Madison, our local bike sharing program is well underway, with many convenient stops already and more to come. Since I fall right smack dab into the target demographic (working person who sometimes needs to work downtown, doesn't like driving, certainly doesn't like driving downtown, and doesn't already own a bike), and since I just joined last week, I thought I'd give some first impressions, as well as some areas that could be improved.

First impression after subscribing: it's fantastic! The bikes are well-designed and well-maintained (at least so far), and comfortable. The basket is a great convenience when you're carrying things.


It also seems to be garnering a lot of interest. At least, pretty much every time I've gone to a station, or even gone past a station, it seems like there's usually at least one person checking it out. Even people who already have bikes have asked me about the program when they see me going around on one. Everybody seems to think it's a cool idea... but then they always walk away.



A few things that I think get in the way of more people using it:
  1. the $10 price tag for just one day is prohibitive. It should be $5 for a day, or $20 for 7 days. Otherwise... we can take the bus all day, farther, and with more free time, for $4.50.
    (Speaking of which, I was promised a text message with a code for $10 off the annual fee when I tried it for a day, which I never received. That almost put me off, right there).

  2. We need more! I know it's a work in progress, and the stations that are there are great, but it's still not really worth it if you have to travel several blocks from your home in the opposite direction from where you're going, just to grab a bike. Often, this results in the trip taking just as long, or even longer, than it would if you just walked there directly.

    Specifically, these are the four places I can think of that could really use a station (indicated by the green "bike" icons. I've also tried to estimate who would be helped the most if there were stations in these areas. All areas and icons have descriptions. The blue lines point to the areas, since they're kind of hard to find otherwise) (click on areas to see descriptions):

    View Recommended B-Cycle locations in a larger map

  3. If I'm passing a B-cycle station and I've never heard of B-cycle before, and I'm going to be making a spur-of-the-moment decision about whether I want to pick up a bike and take it where I'm going, there are a bunch of things that factor into that decision. Price is one consideration, of course, but then there's also, "Is it safe? I've never biked this before (obviously, because I don't own a bike). I don't know what the safe routes are." The first time I tried B-cycle, it was an impulsive decision that I made as I was passing the station on foot. It was the Wisconsin and E. Mifflin station, and I decided to go to Tenney.

    Because I'd never biked in Madison before, I wound up riding along East Johnson. It was ok... until I got to Brearly... and then I was scared to death. Again, not an avid bicyclist, here. If I were, I'd own a bike.

    What we really need, is for that map that's posted by every station, to also suggest safe bike routes from each station to the most likely destination station in each direction. This should be based on the green routes in the Bike Map and Guide that's put out by the city.

    Something like this:

    It's basically the same map, just with some lines added to suggest the bike routes. Especially note the route going North from Tenney Park, which isn't really intuitive for a person who's deciding on the spot that they want to bike without knowing the bike routes or having a bike map handy. But that is the quickest way to go west, safely, for someone who isn't an avid (bicycle-owning) bicyclist. This should be part of the B-cycle station map, so we can see how to safely get to where we're going. It's not necessary to include all of the green routes from the city's map, btw... just the best ones between stations.

Think that's about it for the first impressions. :) Thanks for reading!

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Etched Tree 1


Etched Tree 1
Originally uploaded by Katie M 459
Oh this is fun!

I love GIMP. I know I said that before, but I really love GIMP. This was a little more experimenting, and I did this in about 6 steps, I think.

- Opened the original as layers:
November Tree
- Duplicated the layer twice (to be on the safe side).
- In top layer, inverted color and did a Gaussian blur (5.0 horizontal and vertical).
- Set layer mode to "Grain Merge."
- Merged down. Set Color to Alpha Transparency in the Layers|Transparency menu - the transparent color is that grey. You will know "that grey" when you see it. :)
- Added a new layer for underneath, filled with color of my choice (brown).
- Duplicated the top (tree) layer, and set top layer mode to "screen", with opacity of ~50%.

Voila! Took about 20 minutes, and that's just because I was experimenting and didn't really know what I was doing.

I love GIMP. :)

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Christmas Tree - Modified

Another GIMP experiment. If memory serves, this is what I did:

I opened the original photo as layers.
Christmas Tree 12-25-2009 12-44-36 PM

Duplicated the background layer twice. In top layer, inverted color, did gaussian blur, and set layer mode to "Grain Merge." Merged down one.

In top layer, set alpha transparency level and then did a Sobel edge detection. Set original image to invisible. Added new layer, filled with a dark green.

Opened an "Ice" texture I'd downloaded as layers, set above the green layer and below the Sobel layer. Set transparency to ~70%, I think.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Branches At Sunset


Branches At Sunset
Originally uploaded by Katie M 459
This one was fairly straightforward.

Started with an almost identical photo. Duplicated the layer.

In the duplicate, set transparency alpha channel, then used the select by color tool with a fairly high threshold to get the branches. Inverted selection, hit delete.

Created new layer, bucket filled with light blue. Rendered fog (a GIMP render that seems to only be available on my ubuntu netbook, but not on my Windows computer. Odd.) White. On the new "cloud" layer, did some lighting effects with a high glow, low shininess, and a light orange light.

Did fog two more times, these times with low opacity (~40%) and a couple shades of orange and pink. Merged the three fog layers and the blue background layer. Put underneath the silhouette layer, but over the layer that contains the original picture.

Duplicated the silhouette layer, selected by contiguous color (fairly high threshold), inverted selection, and deleted. Repeat as necessary until I have layers that contained all of the branches, but little of the lower area. Merge the branches. Select by color so that all of the branches are selected, select the original silhouette layer, hit delete (this will separate the silhouettes into one layer that contains the branches, and one layer that contains everything else.

In the layer that contains the stuff other than the branches, do GIMPressionist, select the paintbrush04 brush with fairly high numbers for everything. Apply.

Still in the same layer, do a rectangle select, with feathered edges (high number) and rounded edges (high number), select most of the "sky" area, leaving a space around the corners. Hit delete, so that the impressionistic stuff is mostly on the bottom and the sides, and doesn't detract from the branches layer.

Add a border, since if I've learned anything while looking at Flickr, it's that a border makes all the difference. :) Just a regular border, black, X = ~18, Y = ~44. Add another border around that, light blue, X and Y are both 2. Add the text, and save.

Here is the original photo:
Yahara River 11-20-2009 5-26-54 PM

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Portland Trip 5-22-2009 1-33-28 PM Modified 1

It's official... bump and environmental mapping in lighting are my new best friend. :)

Another experiment. The original photo is here:
Portland Trip 5-22-2009 1-33-28 PM

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Swan Ride


Swan Ride
Originally uploaded by Katie M 459
This was manipulated in GIMP for the "Manipulate This" flickr group, which will hopefully let me in soon. :)

Original by monkeywing is here:
Click here to view the original image by monkeywing
(Just in case - this Flickr group is for submitting your photos to be manipulated by other people. Since monkeywing submitted this photo, permission to manipulate is a given).

Here is how it was done:

Added original as layers. Duplicated layer twice - called one copy "swan 1" and the other "swan 2." Through a process too complicated to go into and kind of self-explanatory, selected the big swan in the "swan 1" layer, inverted selection, and deleted to transparency. Did the same with the little swan in the "swan 2" layer. Merged the two layers and called them, "swans" (this layer now contained the swans, and nothing else).

Saved xcf file, deleted the "background" layer, added white layer underneath swans, merged down, saved as jpg. Undo, undo, undo, etc. until the background layer was back.

Opened the new jpg as layers, moved to bottom. Selected swans layer, did Lighting Effects. Environmental map set to the swans jpg, bump map set to the same (depth ~7ish, if memory serves). Played around with the material - low glow and brightness, higher shininess and polish, and metallic sheen. Applied.

Created a new duplicate of the background layer, called it, "water." In the swans jpg layer, selected the white background by color (0 threshold) to get everything but the swans. Inverted selection to select the swans. Selected the "water" layer, hit delete (this deleted the swans, leaving only the water, since selection areas carry over from one layer to another in GIMP).

Did basically the same thing with the water layer as I did with the swans.

Put the water layer under the swans layer, and voila. :)

Yahara River 11-17-2009 3-27-46 PM Modified 3

Hm. Another attempt at not making these manipulations so dark. Played around with saturation of individual colors, and contrast. Perhaps played around with contrast too much. It does look better large than it does small, I think.

See two posts before for indications of how this was done.

Here's the original:
Yahara River 11-17-2009 3-27-46 PM