Jump to content

 
Photo

open space / trail map

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1
jmk

jmk

    Newbie

  • Validated Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • United States

As continued introduction, I throw my work upon the "dartboard". I have been very impressed with all the feedback I have read from the artisans here, and I value highly what you have to say. It's a two-sided trail map, viewable here: www.mapsmith.org/web/e.html

The zoomify jpeg isn't great quality (my system wouldn't export higher than 100 dpi), so there are links to the pdf's too. The link to "reasoning on design decisions" also explains more about the project. Thanks for any thoughts you have,
John

Attached File  w_0_0_0.jpg   4.92KB   59 downloads

Attached File  e_0_0_0.jpg   4.94KB   58 downloads

Edited by jmk, 01 March 2007 - 08:38 PM.


#2
BEAVER

BEAVER

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Location:Middletown, NY
  • United States

I think the link is busted. Welcome to the board.

#3
MapMedia

MapMedia

    Hall of Fame

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,029 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Davis, California
  • United States

John,

Wow - impressive! Great job.

I am somewhat familiar with this area, and I think it looks excellent - esp the hillshading (good light/darkness balance).

Ideas/comments

1. Incorporate veg coverage into relief tinting - show where the oaks and grass are. If you do this you will make the map more useful to a larger market: naturalists/hikers/biologists. Should be some very good sources of info on this from FRAP and Bay Area agencies.
2. Use CA highway markers (available in ESRI Transportation style).
3. For protected areas, instead of cross-hatching, designate by border, maybe a inner-buffered effect (stay with green color of course).
4. I esp. like the tapered text on the bottom-left.

Can you give us some info on the map story (production hours, etc.). I got the jist from the 'about map' blurb.

Thanks for sharing - keep us posted. Chris

#4
DaveB

DaveB

    Hall of Fame

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,057 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Redlands, CA
  • United States

3. For protected areas, instead of cross-hatching, designate by border, maybe a inner-buffered effect (stay with green color of course).


I like the cross-hatching for those areas. It really does say keep out to me. :)
On the other hand if you don't want it to be that strong you might want to change it.
Dave Barnes
Esri
Product Engineer
Map Geek

#5
Charlie Frye

Charlie Frye

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redlands, CA
  • Interests:Base map design/data model, political/election maps; use of historical maps for modern GIS analysis
  • United States

Very very nice. A few comments:

1. I just met with my local community's trail folks, who I am doing some preliminary mapping for, and one thing that they all said would be helpful is a lat/lon grid. A lot of folks carry their GPSs on the trails, both for monitoring and tracking trail maintenance and for safety.

2. Contour line labels--The spot heights are there, which helps some, but the contour labels would help. These same folks I met with also were very much wanting detailed contour lines--they said a high contour interval does them no good. Most of these folks are experienced horse back riders, and most can read topo-maps, a few are pilots as well, so their expectations for maps are high.

3. I'm not sure what you used for a DEM, but I did find and have used happily a 3M IfSAR DEM from NOAA for my area of SoCal. NOAA has a data download site and you can extract just the area you need--I'm not sure whether your area is covered. I ran the Filter tool in Spatial Analyst with the Lower option on this DEM, since it's first returns, to drop out some of the excessive bumps in more populated areas.

4. If these are horse trails, note the trailheads that have staging grounds.

So, given my first two points I would definitely suggest testing this draft with your potential users. I was surprised by what I got.

Good luck,
Charlie Frye
Chief Cartographer
Software Products Department
ESRI, Redlands, California

#6
Matthew Hampton

Matthew Hampton

    Hall of Fame

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,325 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Interests:Playing in the mountains and rivers.
  • United States

I really like the map and think the comments you have received thus far are right on.

I wanted to bring-up a topic that I have bumped into many times and have not quite resolved yet. It involves using a hypsometric tint in combination with vector fills (i.e. parklands). I think there is a fine line between "multiplying" the vector fills with the tint so you can see the elevation gradient through the boundaries - or taking the approach whereby the tint is knocked out.

I was just curious to know what you all thought. Of course it depends on the map purpose, number of boundary fills, etc.

I think my eye would be pleased a bit more if the tint showed through - but unless it's done right the trade-off is a more difficult map to understand.

co-cartographic creator of boringmaps.com


#7
araki5

araki5

    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:GIS/MAPSERVER/OSSIM/GDAL
  • United States

This map is really detailed! How long did this take? It seems like the raster layer itself would
take a long time to process.

Well done!
Randy Long
GIS/CAD Tech
Mackay and Somps



Raster is Faster, but Vector is Corrector.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

-->