14 replies to this topic

[cristian]

Here's a map I did for the beta version of my set of educational maps. I would appreciate any comments or suggestions about my ? New France 1673 ? (http://www.edmaps.com/nf1673.gif). Thanks.

Cristian Ionita
cristian_ionita@quebecemail.com
www.edmaps.com

[ELeFevre]

Cristian,

Interesting map and well done. Here are few quick suggestions.
I would remove "Legend" from the legend and it give it a more descriptive name. I would also ditch the multi-colored north arrow and go with something more subtle and consistent with the rest of the design. You could also try a different style of scale bar for the same reasons. And of course more time can always be spent adjusting labels. Welcome to the forum! Erin.

[Jean-Louis]

I agree with Erin. and would suggest maybe an old style period-themed North arrow.
I have a personal fascination for the subject matter. There is a great and recent PBS documentary called 'The War that made America' which is all about what this map shows.
Welcome to another fellow Montrealer

[CHART]

Welcome to Cartotalk,

Nice map. It gives a geo-graphic explanation of a complex historic period.

Yep. The fancy colours of the north arrow must go. And the word Legend in the Legend is as for most maps not required. I would experiment with an older style font. Here is a Cartotalk link that shows some neat antique map effects. Obviously not the same purpose (antique vs historic representation) but some ideas could be useful.

http://www.cartotalk...?showtopic=1490

Regards.

[natcase]

My only note is that the hashed areas that overlap with "unclaimed areas" are not keyed. Perhaps changing the key to a bivariate one, where unhashed areas are "recognized claims" and hashed are "unrecogniszed or disputed claims."

[DaveB]

Or take out the north arrow altogether. When you have a graticule and a map that covers such a large area with a projection where north varies across the map I think a north arrow is almost redundant and at best of limited use. Same goes for the scale bar. It can't be accurate across the entire map.

The legend position makes it look like the legend was dropped on almost as an afterthought. I would probably move it entirely within the map neatline and maybe change the neatline around the legend. It doesn't quite seem to go with the map neatline.

What do the hashed lines that only overlap yellow areas mean?

Thanks for sharing the map!

[Cartisan Maps]

I'm undecided on the legend position in the map. It is different, and after looking at many of your other maps, I can see that it is a style you're aiming for. In many cases you've brought in the neatline and border forcing relevant portions of your map to flow over - the legend is another element transcending the border. Something about it, however, isn't perfect. Is it because you use a different stroke (single line, rounded corners), which makes it pop out from your border? Is it because it appears shifted on the X and Y axis, and not at equal amounts?

I think you might be able to get it to work, it might take a little adjustment is all.

One nearly related question I have is why you opted to break the border on the left (west of Lake Winnepeg)?

[cristian]

I thank you for your time and for your suggestions. Your critique is very impressive and I have to agree with you almost completely. In fact, I?ve already begun the reconstruction process and your observations (the north arrow, the scale, the legend ? position, font & content, the hashed lines that only overlap the yellow areas, etc.) made me see more clearly the need for adjustement and helped me to identify all the weak points of my map(s). Thanks again for all your help! Merci beaucoup!

Cristian

P.S. Briefly, some answers concerning this beta version: the hashed lines that only overlap yellow areas = ?non-disputed territorial claims? (France, Spain, England); I?ve cut the border on the left (west of Winnipeg) in order to outline the area of the Rupert?s Land; well, I?m really, really sorry for the multi-colored north arrow...

[Holograph]

Not a criticism, just a question I've wondered about: the lakes along the Missouri River are artificial reservoirs that weren't present in the time period shown on the map. When showing water features on a historical map, present day features might help orient the viewer, but they don't accurately portray the land at the time. I wonder which is better -- show present day features, or strive for historical accuracy within the limits of the data that is available? Obviously rivers meander and change course, so it is hard to find data on historical flowlines, but it is often possible to identify reservoirs.

[natcase]

Not a criticism, just a question I've wondered about: the lakes along the Missouri River are artificial reservoirs that weren't present in the time period shown on the map. When showing water features on a historical map, present day features might help orient the viewer, but they don't accurately portray the land at the time. I wonder which is better -- show present day features, or strive for historical accuracy within the limits of the data that is available? Obviously rivers meander and change course, so it is hard to find data on historical flowlines, but it is often possible to identify reservoirs.

Interestingly, the Upper Mississippi (for example around St Louis and northward) is pretty stable. I did some research for 1000-year-ago maps about 7 years ago, and for St Louis, the river (and the oxbows) are essentially in the same place as when the Cahokia mounds were in place. By contrast, the Missouri River at Kansas City is very different, probably changing every 100 years or so before the current flood-control measures went in in the 20th century. And starting somewhere below St Louis, the river does become much less stable. It would be interesting to see a map of the relative stability of river courses in that system (for example, color-rated by how old the current channel is).

[Dennis McClendon]

the lakes along the Missouri River are artificial reservoirs that weren't present

That's a continuing problem using modern DEMs for historical cartography. I tried to retouch them out for this map
http://www.encyclope...pages/3699.html
but I see I might have missed a couple in Piedmont Virginia.

[travelbug]

A little nick pick: I would prefer to have the central meridian to be sorta at the center in a projection.

[cristian]

I thank you for your comments. Yes, present day features versus geohistorical framework... I agree with you : this is a real question... For a detailed map of the medieval Netherlands (1200-1300, etc.), the answer could be very simple, but for a map of North America in 1600-1700 the answer is not easy to find. For this beta version, I have proposed a present day framework (as a temporary solution), but I'm for historical accuracy and the final version of the maps will be less controversial and more accceptable for historians or teachers. Of course, it's a question of time. Thank you again. Your comments are very helpful for me.

[Hans van der Maarel]

I thank you for your comments. Yes, present day features versus geohistorical framework... I agree with you : this is a real question... For a detailed map of the medieval Netherlands (1200-1300, etc.), the answer could be very simple

Oh, I don't know about that... In the past 800 years we've been doing a lot of reclamation, had some cataclysmic floods and a fair number of wars... Then we came up with spatial planning... A map of The Netherlands from 1200 looks very different from what it looks like now...

[cristian]

I thank you for your comments. Yes, present day features versus geohistorical framework... I agree with you : this is a real question... For a detailed map of the medieval Netherlands (1200-1300, etc.), the answer could be very simple

Oh, I don't know about that... In the past 800 years we've been doing a lot of reclamation, had some cataclysmic floods and a fair number of wars... Then we came up with spatial planning... A map of The Netherlands from 1200 looks very different from what it looks like now...

Mea culpa! I think I have chosen a bad example.