Typography is essential to a maps existence. Without some basic typography rules and conventions a map reader can be totally lost within a maps structure and totally miss that specific maps purpose. A good map should have a well placed title that has a bigger point size than any other type on the map. Cartographers do this to make the title the most important thing on the map and make any reader look at it first to understand what it is they are looking at. Some of the other generic conventions include things like placement of type, color of type, font and as previously discussed, point size.
The placement of type should be so as the reader of the map can easily distinguish what the specific type belongs to. Good maps follow the normal type placement by putting the title of the object on the map first and foremost on the upper right hand side, then if that is not possible the upper left hand side, and again if it is not possible on the lower right hand side of the of the object, then followed with the lower left hand side. If any of these placements are impossible the cartographer should continue to follow cartographic conventions by placing any label of an object on the center right, then the center left, followed by the top offset the right, then finally as a last resort on the bottom of the object set off to the left hand side.
Color of any map should be legible (usually darker or black) and should also include some basic rules such as: any titles that denote water features should be done in blue. Otherwise as long as the color scheme is fairly universal and legible, the map is acceptable.
Font and size are very important to describe important of and object. For example if you have a big city compared to a small city, you will want the big city to be labeled in either bold type or 1-2 point sizes bigger. A uniform font should be used to promote legibility. All labels on water features should be italicized as well as (previously mentioned) blue.
If these basic cartographic rules for typography are followed you can turn a well done map into a highly legible and thus useful well done map. Otherwise your well done map does not communicate the correct message and your well done map is worthless to you audience.
I’ll look at the attached map of Africa as an example. There are some good things and some bad things typographically speaking on this map. For one some of the country titles are done in blue, when I see this in my mind wants to think these are water features, this can lead to distraction which is not what a cartographer wants. One good thing is the bigger, more notable cities have been bolded exemplifying importance. All of the cities are a united font as well which promotes unity throughout the map. All of the countries have been labeled in all capitol letters which helps determine the reader the difference between the cities and countries.
If I were to remake this map I would probably make the countries a unified color and perhaps a point size bigger then the cities. I would also take out some of the more minor waterways that aren’t promoting to the subject of the map. Some of these extra lines are leading to confusion.
The placement of type should be so as the reader of the map can easily distinguish what the specific type belongs to. Good maps follow the normal type placement by putting the title of the object on the map first and foremost on the upper right hand side, then if that is not possible the upper left hand side, and again if it is not possible on the lower right hand side of the of the object, then followed with the lower left hand side. If any of these placements are impossible the cartographer should continue to follow cartographic conventions by placing any label of an object on the center right, then the center left, followed by the top offset the right, then finally as a last resort on the bottom of the object set off to the left hand side.
Color of any map should be legible (usually darker or black) and should also include some basic rules such as: any titles that denote water features should be done in blue. Otherwise as long as the color scheme is fairly universal and legible, the map is acceptable.
Font and size are very important to describe important of and object. For example if you have a big city compared to a small city, you will want the big city to be labeled in either bold type or 1-2 point sizes bigger. A uniform font should be used to promote legibility. All labels on water features should be italicized as well as (previously mentioned) blue.
If these basic cartographic rules for typography are followed you can turn a well done map into a highly legible and thus useful well done map. Otherwise your well done map does not communicate the correct message and your well done map is worthless to you audience.
I’ll look at the attached map of Africa as an example. There are some good things and some bad things typographically speaking on this map. For one some of the country titles are done in blue, when I see this in my mind wants to think these are water features, this can lead to distraction which is not what a cartographer wants. One good thing is the bigger, more notable cities have been bolded exemplifying importance. All of the cities are a united font as well which promotes unity throughout the map. All of the countries have been labeled in all capitol letters which helps determine the reader the difference between the cities and countries.
If I were to remake this map I would probably make the countries a unified color and perhaps a point size bigger then the cities. I would also take out some of the more minor waterways that aren’t promoting to the subject of the map. Some of these extra lines are leading to confusion.
Map From: http://geology.com/world/africa-physical-map.shtml
No comments:
Post a Comment