Well-designed map example:
The above map adheres to multiple design principles. It is, above all, a simple and efficient presentation of the data (Tufteism 2 and “Simplicity from Sacrifice”). The red state outlines make a clear and reasonably accurate impression of the data while the exact percentages are also present for those viewers who need them (Tufteisms 1, 5, 6, 13). There is no “chart junk” (Tufteism #18 and “Maximum Information at Minimum Cost”); even the legend and north arrow have been eliminated. While a legend labeling the color scheme could be used, my perception and interpretation of the map were clear without such explanation.
On the other hand . . .
Poorly-designed map example:
Taken from the map collection provided for this lab, the above map is headache-inducing and clearly
fails to apply many design principles.
Our initial look at the map becomes confused by the many massive bubbles
obscuring smaller bubbles along with the state outlines underneath. Five large bubbles in the east were forced
into displacement due to the bubble crowding.
The displacement combined with the overcrowding and lack of state labels
make accurate identification of where some bubbles belong difficult. The legend, unfortunately, only adds to the
confusion. What, exactly, do the numbers
labeling each bubble size mean? One
intuitive answer is “millions of people,” but this cannot be correct. Thus, we know (or assume) larger bubbles
represent capitals with a larger population than those represented by smaller
bubbles, but the numbers of people represented remain a mystery.
It may be easier to delineate the few principles
this map doesn’t break rather than note the ones it does. Primarily broken, however, are the “clarity,
precision and efficiency” of Tufteism 2; “Simplicity from Sacrifice” and “Maximum
Information at Minimum Cost” from the Five Principles of Cartographic Design;
Tufteism 7 and Commandment 3 on labeling; and Commandment 6 with its demand for
evaluation.
No comments:
Post a Comment