When did google maps images get so bad?

[Reverend Jim]

It used to be that google maps satellite images had pretty good resolution, at least over cities. I haven't checked in some time, but today I noticed that the resolution is barely equivalent to Donkey Kong when it first came out. When did it get so bad?

[Dani]

When people started suing for breach of privacy and they agreed to blur anyone or anything identifiable.

[rproffitt]

Do you mean the sat images? Folk are scouring other sources which are listed at https://gisgeography.com/free-satellite-imagery-data-list/

Still nothing at https://www.google.com/maps/place/Area+51,+NV/@37.2513508,-115.8740472,12z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x80b81baaba3e8c81:0x970427e38e6237ae!8m2!3d37.2430548!4d-115.7930198 Funny thing they do on Google. Try to get a ground view.

[Reverend Jim]

When people started suing for breach of privacy and they agreed to blur anyone or anything identifiable.

I can see that for images of people, but satellite images and google street view of buildings? Google accepts requests to blur street numbers, and the automatically (I think) blur licence plates. But if I can get sharp images from street view, why degrade satellite imagery? I compared the current satellite image of our cottage from a nap I took a few years ago and the new image absolutely sucks in comparison.

[Dani]

Companies with offices and buildings spread across campuses complained that satellite view disclosed more information than could be gathered from a public-facing street as to secret projects and other classified goings-on. (Here in Silicon Valley, think Googleplex or Apple Park).

The argument, in the case of military bases and such, was that it was a matter of national security for satellite view to disclose anything behind any privacy fence on any private or government-owned property.

Civilians jumped on the bandwagon and said that it violates their privacy rights for nosey neighbors to have a bird’s eye view of exactly what goes on in their backyard. Another argument was that it opened up another Avenue for burglars to scope out entry and exit points and location of back doors and good hiding places in backyards.

[rproffitt]

The sat view is usually old as in months or even years so you can't be sure if what you see is there now.
However I found the sat view useful as one day it updated on my old house which mom lived in. Sat view showed the tree out front had died. Called mom from Canada to ask what's with that tree. Yup, dead. Had it removed the next week.

[Dani]

From Canada? Aren't you in SoCal?

[rproffitt]

Grew up mostly in SoCal, off to the Vancouver BC area for 8 years, off to near Boston for 10 and now in SoCal.

Why? Jobs.

[jwenting]

Google probably switched to a lower resolution provider.
Whether that's forced because of unavailability of other data (maybe a supplier went out of business, or isn't allowed any longer to sell them the data) or to save money (lower resolution images are cheaper than higher resolution ones) I don't know.

As to people wanting their property blurred out, it happens and often for good reasons beyond "muh privacy" (though that is in itself a valid reason). For example I met someone who has to have an extensive private security detail after several attempts on their life over the last several years, including attempts to shoot burning material at her house to cause fires, and an attempt to drive a truck through her fence and into her house in an attack similar to the 1983 Beirut attack on the US Marines.
Her place has not just been blurred, the entire area has been replaced with fake data for her protection (it now looks just like the forested surroundings, even the access roads are gone).

And as said, military installations tend to be either blurred or get the same treatment and are simply not there at all. Or if they are they tend to have low resolution images only by design.

[Brutal_1]

You can use photo editors

[Reverend Jim]

Photo editors, free or paid, can not add detail to pictures. They can improve things like colour and contrast. But that wasn't the point of this thread.

Plus, you left out FastStone Image Viewer which I've used for years. The built-in image editing tools handle about 95% of my needs and have a near-zero learning curve.

Again - off topic.