10 replies to this topic

[lost_tree]

Hello CartoTalkers.

I'm developing a second iteration of a map I created for our non-profit organization which highlights our preserves and other conservation projects where we've been involved. This map will be surrounded by pretty landscape shots and some explanatory text (our graphic designer is in control of that portion of the publication... very territorial) and will be made available to staff and members as a fold-up printed map.

I've struggled primarily with how to best label the project location points, since they are really the focus of the map. The flip side of the printed document will have a B&W road map displaying locations and driving directions to projects that are open to visitation, so this side of the map is meant to just illustrate all of the areas around the state where our organization has been involved.

BTW this map was created entirely in ArcMap 9.1.

Thanks for your feedback and advice!

Conservation Project Map

[benbakelaar]

First off, beautiful map! Inspiring for me particularly since it was made entirely in ArcGIS 9.1.

This map will be surrounded by pretty landscape shots and some explanatory text (our graphic designer is in control of that portion of the publication... very territorial) and will be made available to staff and members as a fold-up printed map.

I've struggled primarily with how to best label the project location points, since they are really the focus of the map.

Since your audience is staff and members, my first reaction is that you don't even have to worry too much, since the interest in the map is already there. Relatively speaking, compared to maps where you have to really "convince" the audience to use it.

What really stands out to me is the contrast of the terrain, particularly the dark gray ravines. My eye gets caught in those while scanning the map. I don't have a recommendation for a different color or symbol type (for the project location points), maybe something more bold/colorful, but I would definitely lighten the terrain and lower the contrast even more than you've done already.

[Matthew Hampton]

Lovely map! I think your struggle has paid off well. The only thing that throws me is the hydro. I would change the color values for the water (maybe try c-45, m-10, y-5). The bathy is a nice touch but again I think the colors need to be tamed a bit (esp. the shallow values).

[DaveB]

Very nice work! Personally I think the colors are fine. Do you plan to label all of the points?

[Charlie Frye]

Very cool depiction, though one pet peeve--lose the north arrow. Your projection is clearly not cylindrical--perhaps it's conformal or polygonic--I can't quite tell, but either way a north arrow is neither sufficient nor needed.

Also, give the legend a title--something that explains what the map is depicting--I downloaded the large size and still couldn't figure it out at a glance.

Good work!

Charlie

[CHART]

Jesse Welcome to CartoTalk.

Nice looking map. The fact that you build this map entirely within a GIS is impressive.
As others suggested the terrain representation seems a bit overwhelming. To that effect you might want to consider adding a transparent boxed background to your labels with a light color (something near white).

Again nice map,

[supercooper]

Indeed, very impressive that you did all of that in ArcMap. Not an easy task to accomplish. I like the colors. Very nice job.

[Martin Gamache]

Jesse,

I think the colors need a bit of work.

The lowlands look good but the mountainous areas just turn into a big mass of oversaturated gray. Not sure why that is if you've got too much going on in there. What is your approach to this colour scheme. Just hypsometric or....

[lost_tree]

Jesse,

I think the colors need a bit of work.

The lowlands look good but the mountainous areas just turn into a big mass of oversaturated gray. Not sure why that is if you've got too much going on in there. What is your approach to this colour scheme. Just hypsometric or....

I basically used the Blue Marble global imagery for underlying land cover, but with the contrast severly reduced. As others have mentioned, I think the hillshade is too strong and needs to be emphasized, which may be causing the grayness you're referring to.

Thanks for the input!

Indeed, very impressive that you did all of that in ArcMap. Not an easy task to accomplish. I like the colors. Very nice job.

Thanks supercooper!

Jesse Welcome to CartoTalk.

Nice looking map. The fact that you build this map entirely within a GIS is impressive.
As others suggested the terrain representation seems a bit overwhelming. To that effect you might want to consider adding a transparent boxed background to your labels with a light color (something near white).

Again nice map,

Thanks for the suggestion. I agree regarding the shaded relief... there's too much contrast in the mountainous areas.

Very nice work! Personally I think the colors are fine. Do you plan to label all of the points?

Thanks DaveB! Some of these points represent "sensitive" projects, so they won't be labeled (the result of a very political process amongst staff )

Very cool depiction, though one pet peeve--lose the north arrow. Your projection is clearly not cylindrical--perhaps it's conformal or polygonic--I can't quite tell, but either way a north arrow is neither sufficient nor needed.

Also, give the legend a title--something that explains what the map is depicting--I downloaded the large size and still couldn't figure it out at a glance.

Good work!

Charlie

The north arrow is unnecessary I suppose... Just a convention I've gotten accustomed to I guess. Thanks for the advice!

Lovely map! I think your struggle has paid off well. The only thing that throws me is the hydro. I would change the color values for the water (maybe try c-45, m-10, y-5). The bathy is a nice touch but again I think the colors need to be tamed a bit (esp. the shallow values).

Thanks cartomat. I agree that the hydro is probably a bit much. Thanks for the suggestion!

[pghardy]

The original link to Flickr no longer works - can you provide another location so we can all admire it?

[lost_tree]

The original link to Flickr no longer works - can you provide another location so we can all admire it?

Here's a link to an updated version of the map: http://www.flickr.co...19898047&size=l

Thanks again everyone for your input!

Jesse