Cartomyopia

I had a nice email discussion today about a map.  I'll save the blushes of the person(s) who made it but it was a little (ahem!) sub-par. Thing is, it won't be long before it's touted by marketeers as being the next greatest thing....then it struck me. The world is suffering from a hideous new affliction...cartomyopia.

I've been pondering for quite some time now how we can encourage people to make better maps.  As an ex-University lecturer I could do this in class and students would enter the workforce able to make their analysis look good on a map and communicate properly.  I'm very proud of a good number of my former students whose work makes me smile in the right way.  I'm also proud to have been involved in the British Cartographic Society's Better Mapping workshops as far back as 2006. But what about those that never received any formal training or go to a workshop? What about those who can't be bothered reading a few pages from a book or a web site that shows them some useful tips? What about those who are just plain too arrogant to receive constructive criticism?  Well, these people, my friends, are cartomyopic.  They suffer from the short-sighted delusion that their carto work works...that it is beyond reproach and that no amount of advice or critical comment could possibly improve it.  They suffer from a lack of awareness that cartography (and cartographers) might have something to offer to help them make their work better.

I don't know what it is about maps but for some reason everyone thinks they can make one. Why is it when faced with the need to do some statistical analysis most will run a mile, not even engage in the process and try and find someone else to do the work...but when it comes to the map, sure, pass me the crayola and I'll whip one up for ya!  It's partly because software makes it easier than ever and for those interested in making a map it's easy to see how it might be viewed in a similar light to writing a letter using Word or creating a photo album using Flickr. Cartography has gone mainstream....well, map-making has at the very least.  Those who hang on to the notion that there remains a cartographic "profession" might want to take a reality check.  They (we?) are now merely cartographic advisers.  The minority. We might think we make better maps (and the proof often supports that argument) but there's only one way that map-making is headed...more mainstream.

Andy Woodruff recently wrote a good blog over at Axis Maps on the problem of aesthetics in cartography and I think he touched on some useful points.  If we go back 10 years, software provided the functionality to make a map. You pretty much had to make your fingers bleed to extract a decent map but the functions of the map were what drove the software's capabilities (class ranges, simple symbolisation, basic layouts).  They weren't beautiful but they were at least functional.  Those that needed to read them did so.  Now...everyone wants to make a pretty map because as Woodruff states..."eye candy sells". Form is now overtaking function and our new breed of cartomyopic map-makers want a pretty map, made quickly, consumed in seconds by a large audience and then tossed in the bin because it's a transient object with a short shelf-life.  The map is not meant to last. It matters only for a single event, sometimes in real-time and rarely meant to be lasting and the software now supports the ability to apply pretty effects to free data.  This is picto-bite map-making (bit like sound-bite but in pictorial form) where the search for the viral map that captures attention is more important than creating a well constructed, purposeful product. Maps made by consumers for consumers, designed to be glanced at, have some sort of instant interest but no lasting purpose or appeal.  Is this wrong? Well on one hand I'd say no...instantly appealing maps of events with a short life-span are fine (all those Olympics maps were only useful for a couple of weeks) but why should this mean they have to suffer from poor construction and function?

Woodruff again: "Cartographic expertise is, in essence, knowing the right way to represent geographic phenomena and data for analytical or various other purposes, and understanding of all stages of the mapping process, not simply knowing how to swoop in at the end and make a map pretty. Sure, we can make every map delicious by wrapping it in metaphorical (or real?) bacon, but it won’t be good for you."

This is cartomyopia...the short-sighted view that making a map look pretty will serve its purpose and not appreciating that it's fundamentally bad for you.  So the big question is not how do we make people make better maps, it's how do we arrest this modern carto-plague and make cartomyopic people who already think they know how to make maps... make better maps.  These people hate criticism and get most indignant if the error of their ways is pointed out; they hate being embarrassed by having mistakes pointed out...maybe that suggests deep down they do actually know? Working with them is the answer but here's the next big problem...they so rarely seek help or advice from a cartographer (possibly because they know it'll create more work) so the first time you get to see the work is often when it's published having gone through a marketing department that usually suffers from the even more chronic form of cartomyopia (application of modifications to make it even worse).  This inevitably leads to criticism, apoplectic observations by cartonerds like me and the cycle of annoyance and the plethora of cartofails continues.

So what's the prescription for cartomyopia?  Well the first step is to get them to a meeting where they can admit, in a friendly and non-threatening way that they are a cartomyopic. No one will laugh. No-one will belittle them for their admission. Quite the opposite...most cartographers I know are crying out to help and provide the medication.  We want to encourage better mapping and not just to make maps pretty. We want to help people see through their cartomyopia and learn that telling a good story with maps is not just about making any map-type object look good for an unassuming, uninitiated audience...its about making it work so they get the right message efficiently. In this sense, addressing the output is the wrong way to go about it.  We need to address the process.  We need to be seen as valuable at the outset of a project where maps are going to be made to encourage from within. We need to get marketing departments to value our opinions because ultimately a good map will 'sell' more. We need to be taken seriously for our expertise but in order for that to happen we need to overcome the scurge of cartomyopia.

By the way...don't think I'm for one minute suggesting all cartographers are immune to bouts of cartomyopia.  In its acute form we can all suffer....it comes in short bursts and usually ends with a close friend or colleague pointing out something so mind-numbingly obvious that we'd overlooked. Happens to me all the time...but what I try and do before unleashing a map on the world is address the issue before it gets out. That's all I'm encouraging others to do....manage their own cartomyopia and use the ready and willing support network of cartographers to do so.

Apple maps (in the loosest sense of the word)

The new Apple iOS6 release has led to a wave of map related hysteria.  There's a terrific Tumblr that's doing a great job of compiling some fantastic carto-gaffes in the new Apple maps app.  My current favorite...

BBC News gives Apple's maps a pretty rough ride as do any number of others including Apple Insider and Gizmodo. It's all very amusing and, one suspects, Google are having a pleasant day at the office having been dropped on iOS6 in favour of Apple's own map app.  But what are we actually seeing?

We're seeing a company renowned for highly polished product pushing out a poor map and that in itself is feeding the sneering hordes.  Sub-standard product would make Steve Jobs turn in his grave but it proves one thing...making a solid, accurate, searchable, well designed and useable online map (and one that works well on a mobile device) is no easy game.  You can't do it quickly and if you don't know what you're doing you're going to make the sort of errors that we're seeing.  Let's not forget though, Google's own initial efforts were ridiculed and they had their own carto-gaffes in the early days...poorly matched satellite imagery, administrative boundaries in the wrong place, labels poorly positioned...not to mention the awful colours, layout and the fact that most of the known world was missing initially.

The problem for Apple is they need to react quickly to get their map app up to speed.  Google have had 7 years of development.  They have learnt a lot in that time, not least that cartography is not easy.  Apple's initial offering seems to suggest they've poured their map data into a really agricultural and restrictive set of styles.  They've done precious little error checking and none of that manual grunt work required to iron out the problems so we're seeing all manner of missing or incorrectly located POIs, weak navigation and search, terrible satellite imagery...an even worse hybrid satellite/map effort and more.  It'll be interesting to see how they improve on their map app over the coming months and years but of course...everyone else has a huge head start and will be working on their own products.

Quite simply, Apple dropped the ball on this one and didn't appreciate the difficulty of making a good map that people can use. With maps and location being absolutely central to how we use mobile devices this is potentially a really big deal. I suspect many will simply not upgrade to iOS6 or will just overcome the mild inconvenience of launching a web browser to hit a better map....or they may just wait until Google publish their own Google iO6 map app in the Apple store which will just make Apple's job even harder.

Me? I use Android...

Zen and the art of cartography

For those that asked and for those that may be vaguely interested, here is my 'Zen and the art of cartography' presentation. I gave this at the British Cartographic Society in June 2012 (UK) and then an updated version at GeoCart 2012 in August (New Zealand). You can view the images below or if you want the accompanying notes, click through to view on Slideshare itself (and select the notes tab below the slides). To be honest...it'll make very little sense without the notes unless you just like pretty pictures!

 

Zen and art of cartography from Kenneth Field

What would Harry have thought of it all?

Today sees yet another bastardization of H. C. Beck's London Underground map. londonist.com report on a new tube map showing Olympic medal winners.

Rarely a day goes by these days without someone or other taking their own dataset, failing to have a single ounce of their own imagination and slapping it on one of the most famous maps in the world. The data often have no connectivity, no relationship with transport or journey planning and absolutely no need to be displayed as a schematic diagram. But hey, if you want to get people interested...imitation is the sincerest form of plagiarism right?

Now even TfL have got in on the act with an "if you can't beat them, join them" attitude for this latest version is an 'official product', available as a limited edition through their online shop. As those who know me will already know...I am an avid fan of Beck's map. I am also a fan of some of the original uses of it as a vehicle for other, re-engineered purposes (e.g. The Great Bear, 1992) but the time has come to say enough is enough. It's also the last straw and I am hereby announcing a forthcoming paper penned by myself and William Cartwright on this very issue...

PS...did I buy it? yes of course...I'm a map addict. Dammit.