Computer Cartography - Module 1 - Map Critique

 

In this week's module, the topic was the principles of map design. We learned about the history of map-making and how designs have evolved over time. Next, we were introduced to cartographer Edward Tufte who outlined 20 design principles that have been reduced to 6 commandments that we used as a guide to reinforce our understanding of what makes a map good or bad. In this lab, we were tasked with choosing an example of a well designed map and an example of a poorly designed map. Using our new knowledge of map design principles from our class lecture we then critiqued our two maps.

This well-designed map displays the state of South Carolina's wildlife area game zones. Although it may not convey complex information, it is a good example of how to balance and organize various map elements. This map is easy to read, aesthetically pleasing, and leaves no mystery to the reader of what the map maker is trying to convey. The first component that appeals to my aesthetic is that the map maker did a great job with the layout balancing the map elements within the white/negative space around the state polygon. The second component that appeals to me is the creator’s use of the increased weight of the boundary lines that help bring attention to the boundaries for each game zone. Personally, I think they might be a little too heavy but I like the idea. The third component that appeals to my aesthetic is that it is void of unnecessary “map junk” and as mentioned in our lecture, it is simple but effectively communicates its objective. The only negative I see about this map is that some of the county labels run into the boundary lines making the last letter in a few cases illegible. The other potential negative is that Zone 1 occupies the northern portions of Oconee, Pickens, and Greenville counties while the southern portions belong to Zone 2.  The map reader could be confused because the southern portions of these counties appear as though they could be additional counties that are unlabeled. Overall, this map displays sound design principles as described in Edward Tufte’s 6 Commandments.

This map stood out to me as a poor design example because it appears there was little to no pre-conceptual planning before the creation of this map. It lacks any substantial information that might convey its intended purpose or meaning. The labels and symbols are often overlapping making the map so chaotic that it is impossible to draw any meaningful information from it. The first area of improvement would be to determine the map's intended meaning and express this by adding a title. After this is established then all irrelevant data can be removed leaving only what is relevant to the map's intended purpose. With these things complete, a proper layout could be determined to allow for the desired placement of the map elements. The third area of improvement would be to reevaluate the size and design of the north arrow and scale bar. Even if these elements were properly placed, they would almost certainly be too large. At the least, the scale bar would need to display a unit of distance. Overall, this map is a good example of how important planning and forethought are for map-making as well as the evaluation of your final product.