Module 1 - Introduction to Cartography & Map Design - Map Critique Lab Assignment

         In this module I was introduce to the fundamental of map design, both in essential informative and substantive features as well as affective and aesthetic features. This lab prompted me to evaluate two maps of my choice from a list; one I deemed to be exemplary and one I deemed to be of poor design. I evaluated these maps on many criteria. I first approached them from a general sense based on what stood out to me at a glance. I then evaluated more specific areas of design like cartographic design, composition, layout, essential map features, symbology, and qualitative & quantitative information. I used the six Tufte map commandments as a basis for my evaluation. These commandments are a summarized inclusion of Edward Tufte's "Tufteisms", and were explained to me in course lecture. They are as follows:

▪ Commandment 1: Map Substantial Information (Tufteisms 1, 2, 3, 4, and 20).

▪ Commandment 2: Don’t Lie with Maps (Tufteisms 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, and 13).

▪ Commandment 3: Effectively Label Maps (Tufteisms 7 & 8).

▪ Commandment 4: Minimize Map Crap (Tufteisms 11, 14, 15, 16, and 18).

▪ Commandment 5: Map Layout Matters (Tufteism 19).

▪ Commandment 6: Evaluate your Map (Tufteism 17).

    (Information from UWF GeoData Center)

    

    The following map is the one I chose as an exemplary map based on cartographic design:

The map aims to portray the boundaries that encompass the six wildlife management game zones in South Carolina. This map is perfect for its intended use. From a substantive perspective, all essential map elements are present. The north arrow is placed in a clear space and sized as to not be distracting. The scale bar represents both specific and broad areas of the mapped area. The legend is easily understood and corresponds well with supplemented information and symbology on the focus map. Information portrayed directly represents the title of the map and provides external links to more information that may be important, but not to the map itself.  This is meant to be a starting point for the viewer and is therefore meant to be informative yet consumable. There is no clutter, or “map crap” as per the “Tufteisms”. The layout maximizes map area space while not sacrificing text and labels. Affectively, the map is aesthetically pleasing with soft colors that have hard boundaries. This allows the map to not be visually aggressive while still emphasizing the importance of these boundaries. It is bright and almost fun to look at. It engages the reader at a glance and makes it very easy to follow. The large numbers that indicate game zones supplement the legend and are legible, prominent, and important without encroaching on other key map features. On a grading scale, I would give this map an A. It would have achieved an A+ had it included some indication that the labels within state boundaries were the names of counties, albeit this is obvious to those with some level of higher education.

Next I will provide my critique for the map I deemed poor in design:

          This map suffers greatly from the Tufte map commandment regarding “map crap”. It is awfully busy and incoherent. The map aims to portray where certain sitcoms take place within the United States. However, there is no indication whether this aims to show just the state it is placed in, or if the placement of the label is some sort of indication of the city as well. What’s more, labels stretch over multiple states and there are no commas or other forms of separation so some names could be confused with another. The greatest flaw here is the inclusion of sitcoms in major cities such as Chicago, NYC, and Los Angeles.  This information could have been communicated much better. First off, major cities should have some sort of symbology to indicate them. Next, labels should have either been smaller, or there should have been some code assigned to them in a list on the side of the page that would allow the viewer to correspond them to their location.  Names of sitcoms in the same city could even have a color assigned to them to indicate their similar locations. Scale is also an issue here, as it is obvious to me that while the mainland 48 states of the U.S. follow a unified scale, Alaska and Hawaii are not displayed in the same scale and either look too small or too large. This directly defies the Tuft map commandment of avoiding lies within your map, whether qualitatively or quantitatively. I believe that these states should have been inset maps with their own scale bars to better represent those areas. I think the most egregious omission in this map is the lack of state name labels. This makes it so the viewer not only needs some prior knowledge of popular culture to grasp it, but also inherent knowledge of the United States. This makes it unappealing to audiences outside the U.S. that may have interest in the information. On a grading scale I would give this map an F, based on the reasons stated.