Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: The US in 2085

  1. #11
    Guild Master Chashio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    2,312

    Default

    Ha! Cool
    Kaitlin Gray - Art, Maps, Etc | Patreon | Instagram

  2. #12
    Software Dev/Rep Hai-Etlik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    48° 28′ N 123° 8′ W
    Posts
    1,333
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Sorry but this is going to be rather critical.

    Your in progress thread for this map indicates that you are using a base map and recolouring the relief presentation of the existing map. Even if the original is public domain or provided under a license that doesn't require credit, not giving credit is plagiarism as it gives the impression you did the work of building that relief layer yourself (It's a lie of omission to the people seeing it). Plagiarism isn't (generally) illegal like copyright infringement is but it's widely considered unethical. You should strongly consider including credit for the original map you modified. It doesn't have to be in the image but the first post of the thread would be a good idea along with a caption, footnote, or something like that any time you present it. Raw map geometry is a grey area, but presentation is absolutely a matter for copyright and plagiarism.

    No cartographer would use this projection (it looks like maybe a Winkel Tripel?) for a map with this extent. It looks clearly 'skewed' and has steadily increasing scale distortion from one side to the other. Most maps of the US and North America as a whole are done in conic or azimuthal projections centred in the US.

    The OCR font is also rather out of place. It's intended for letting primitive computer vision systems read text while still being somewhat readable by humans. It's used for standardized forms like cheques that need to be processed via optical recognition. Such fonts have been replaced by much more natural looking ones as computer vision algorithms have improved. There's no way a primitive OCR system would need to read a reference map like this, and if it did you would have to significantly improve the contrast. All it really accomplishes is to hurt the human readability. The highly condensed font used for the smaller city labels is also a bad choice. As text gets smaller you generally want to make it wider to improve readability. That font seems like it was meant for large titles, not for very small labels.

    The contrast in general is also not very good. It looks nice this way, but it makes the map harder to read. You need to decide what's important: what information is needed for the purpose the map is fulfilling. Then you need to make sure that information is absolutely as clear as possible. In this case it seems like the political, population, and contamination information is the point and the physical base map is just to provide a point of reference. If that's the case, then you should tone it down. Reduce the contrast within the base layer, and move it away from the middle range of luminosity so that the important features can contrast with it better and stand out. It's also very hard to distinguish the biohazard and radiation symbols; adding a colour difference between them would help.

    Your labelling is also a bit haphazard. Try to stay consistent about how you label any particular kind of feature. If political area features should always be labelled the same way. Always a horizontal label near the centre or always a gentle curve stretched over the extent of the area. Try to keep exceptions to a minimum, and keep each kind of exception consistent: if you have curved area labels and want to label a very small area, then always label such areas the same alternate way, say by using a horizontal label nearby as if they were point features. Straight line diagonal labels are also a bad idea, they just look ugly on most maps. Having a label partly hidden under a partially transparent neatline/border is particularly bad for readability.

    Labeling is one of the hardest parts of cartography. "Positioning Names on Maps" by Eduard Imhof is an excellent resource.

  3. #13

    Default

    By Hai-Etlik
    Sorry but this is going to be rather critical.
    Yes indeed! As far as I am concerned, critics are always welcome.
    I do agree with you concerning giving credit to the base map, so thanks for pointing it. I corrected this.

    Concerning the labels (a difficult task as you said), I could have done better placements for a part them, but I like those fonts and they convey the "retrofuture" feel I wanted imho. Kinda the same concerning colors/contrast, I guess it's a matter of taste here.
    About the projection, I wasn't looking for a precise map keeping distances, but rather a general view. The funny thing is that I took a small part of the original map that cover the whole America.

    Again, thanks for giving your view.

  4. #14
    Guild Adept acrosome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    35.2, -106.5
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Colorado Springs didn't get nuked? Someone on the other side needs to be fired for that one- it's the ultimate C3 target.

    Being a resident, I'm curious about the story behind Colorado's new independence...

  5. #15

    Default

    Well it's still the United States, but with bigger states (except for Colorado). To answer your question : Colorado has been spared precisely due its communications abilities. It was coordinating a defense system based on "diverting" the missiles rather than destroying them, and it has been pretty much efficent except where the strikes were just too numerous.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •