I started the Kuakata Coastal Forecast because the shoreline is not a fixed line waiting to be traced. It moves, disappears, returns, and looks different depending on the image, the season, and the decision made by the person drawing it.

The project is about coastal expansion, shoreline change, and what the area might look like around 2035. That sounds like a prediction, but the first work is much less dramatic: set up the study area, choose a coordinate system, understand the imagery, and decide what counts as a useful comparison.

The QGIS project is already set to EPSG:32646. That small technical decision matters because a map becomes difficult to trust when its foundations are vague. I am learning that the forecast is not the first output. The first output is knowing what the evidence can carry.

I would rather make a careful map with visible uncertainty than a confident picture that hides its assumptions.