Module 1: Map Critique

The purpose of this lab is to use the common map design principles (Tufteisms) to identify good and poor map design. This lab is a critique of two maps, one well-designed and one poorly-designed. By spending time evaluating the map elements, I am becoming familiar with the elements that appeal to my own design aesthetic. I enjoyed "digging deep" and examining the elements that comprise maps and considering why those elements were good or poor choices to convey the objective of the map. The hardest part of this assignment was selecting the two maps to evaluate. There are many from which to choose, and some maps are mixture of both good and poor design elements. The biggest take away is to keep revising a map as it is being designed, stepping away often and asking for different points of view. In this way, a map can be resolved and become the "best" it can be.

Well-designed map:

Evaluation Synopsis

The “South Carolina Wildlife Management Area Game Zones” map is an example of a well-designed map. The map shows how the use of Map Design Principles result in a well-designed map. The map effectively uses the following Map Design Principles, aka Tufetisms:

Tufteism 2 – The map conveys its objective with “clarity, precision and efficiency”. The objective of this map is to show the locations of the wildlife management areas (WMAs) game zones in South Carolina. The game zones are clearly and precisely identified with a distinctive color that is easily distinguishable from all others and each game zone is boldly outlined in a same color on the map. This makes each game zone immediately identifiable.

Tufteism 7 – The map makes use of labeling in a “clear, detailed and thorough way in order to defeat graphical distortion and ambiguity”.  The game zone numbers are added on the map in each zone and the numbers are large, bold and easily recognizable. Although it seems redundant, this option is nice for those who are color blind. In addition, the counties and their names are added on the map which orients the audience to location, but does not detract from, but rather adds to, the objective of the map.

Tuteism 18 – The map “forgoes chartjunk”. There is nothing extraneous on this map. All design elements and choices support the theme and objective of the map: to identify WMA game zones.

This utilitarian map is simple and clean, which appeals to my design aesthetic. The use of colors is bold and effective; the labeling is simple and the layout is uncluttered. The design of the map and use of symbology and essential map elements results in a deceptively simple map that still effectively conveys its message.

Poorly-designed map:

Evaluation Synopsis

The “U.S.A. Sitcom Map” map is an example of a poorly-designed map. The objective of the map is difficult to ascertain because of the design of the map. The map shows how not using the Map Design Principles (Tufteisms 2, 3, & 7) result in a poorly-designed, and thus, poorly-understood map. The following Map Design Principles could use improvement:

Tufteism 3 – The map does not give the viewer “the greatest number of ideas in the shortest time with the least ink in the smallest space.” Sitcom names are listed everywhere on the map; in some instances without orienting the audience to their intended location. The names are also listed in white spaces on the sides as lists by location; presumably for locations where a lot of sitcoms were filmed/located like the Los Angeles Area. These lists are arranged on the page on the white space and their locations on the page are near the state to which they belong, but they make the map look crowded and certainly do not use the “least ink in the smallest space.” To improve the scattered appearance, the creator could use a callout with a line to the state and shrink the names of the sitcoms to better fit the space. Alternatively, the names of the sitcoms could be artistically inserted into the states – to artfully fill the shape of the state.

Tufteism 7 – The labeling is not “clear, detailed or thorough” which causes ambiguity. It looks like the map creator intended for the titles of the sitcoms to be placed on the state where they were filmed and although this works for some large states, such as Texas or Alaska, the sitcom locations get lost elsewhere on the map and it becomes difficult to determine which sitcom goes with which state (e.g. WKRP). To improve the labeling, the font size of the sitcom names could be smaller. In addition, points on the states with lines would associate the state with the correct sitcom, especially in areas that are crowded – like the Midwest.

Tufteism 18 – The map does not “forgo chartjunk.” The states are a few different colors and this is not explained. There appears be to be no need for the different colors. Also, Hawaii is the only state that shows topography, but this does not add any value or information to the theme of the map. To improve the map appearance and eradicate the “chartjunk”, all the states could be made the same neutral color or clear/white. In addition, eliminate the topography on Hawaii for consistency.