16 replies to this topic

[Matthew Hampton]

The maps are the bindery getting folded right now and I thought I would post a sample. There are a total of 11 inset maps (back side) and 1 regional map that were printed on Polyart. This is our 8th edition and we changed quite a few things (extent, scale, classification, etc.) this time around to make it easier to use and more informative. I added a new symbol to indicate uphills that I have termed "elevation fins." I have never really liked the typical "chevron" hill-symbol and crafted the fins instead.

I have posted the Downtown Portland inset, a legend and an overview map showing the insets.

 Downtown.jpg   1.22MB   305 downloads

 legend_copy.jpg   153.91K   123 downloads

 Overview022410_1.png   1.17MB   184 downloads

[Rob]

Nice work Matt!

Why the SW lighting on the overview map?

[Matthew Hampton]

I created a plan-oblique hillshade for the full regional map and used it for the overview map as well.

I think if you used the standard NW lighting for a plan-oblique you'd go blind.

[Rob]

LOL.

Perhaps it's my lack of familiarity with this terrain or the high angle that i didn't not see this.

Why did you choose to use a plan oblique relief for this map?

[DaveB]

I didn't catch the plan oblique either, but I did notice I wasn't seeing an inversion effect. Interesting.
Nice work, Matthew!

[CHART]

Nice work.

Not sure on the Bike shop symbol. (Looks a bit like a grapefruit) and it does not match (IMO) the rest of your symbol palette.

Also notice that "Spring water on the Willamette" is reading upside down... In the old days that was a no no (except for contour labels)


Regards,

[Matthew Hampton]

I rendered a plan oblique for the regional side and really liked the perspective. I had it on hand and used it for the overview map too. FWIW - it's only 2.75" x 4" on paper so the effect is moderate.

Our agency purchased just purchased over 1100 acres for preservation on Chehalem Ridge (the semi crescent-shaped ridge in the SW) and I like how the plan oblique highlights that area.

LOL.

Perhaps it's my lack of familiarity with this terrain or the high angle that i didn't not see this.

Why did you choose to use a plan oblique relief for this map?

[Matthew Hampton]

The Bike shop symbol corresponds to the cover art. I wanted at least one element on the map to thread back to the art we used on the cover and in other spot locations. We worked with Hot Pepper Studios for the art, some focus groups, etc.

Here's the cover. It has ties to our Walk There! guidebook.

 front_v1.jpg   79.07K   46 downloads

Nice work.

Not sure on the Bike shop symbol. (Looks a bit like a grapefruit) and it does not match (IMO) the rest of your symbol palette.

Regards,

[Dennis McClendon]

One minor detail I'd like to hear opinions about: the park shapes not going all the way to the street lines. I'm about 75% done with a new edition of the Chicagoland bikemap, and for the first time am able to use GIS data for the basemap. Careful GIS digitizing doesn't include street right-of-ways as part of local park parcels, so when the street line weight is very narrow, the parks don't touch the surrounding streets. Does this bother anyone else?

[Charles Syrett]

Yes, Dennis, this kind of stuff bothers me. It looks so....GIS-y. When I get this kind of situation, I like to drag-select that part of the line in and pull it over to the road, or, if necessary, redraw. (I'm assuming FreeHand here; not sure if you can do that kind of editing in Illy.)

Charles Syrett
Map Graphics
http://www.mapgraphics.com

One minor detail I'd like to hear opinions about: the park shapes not going all the way to the street lines. I'm about 75% done with a new edition of the Chicagoland bikemap, and for the first time am able to use GIS data for the basemap. Careful GIS digitizing doesn't include street right-of-ways as part of local park parcels, so when the street line weight is very narrow, the parks don't touch the surrounding streets. Does this bother anyone else?

[Paul H]

Please pardon my ignorance, but to me the regional map looks like the lighting if from the Northeast. And the river and lake by Camas (upper-right) look like they are on top of ridges, as does the river by Estacada (lower-right). I'm not experienced with plan-oblique, but I would think that on the plan-oblique regional map the inset boundaries would not be parallelograms. Again, I might be looking at this all wrong. Just my observations.

[Paul H]

OK, I looked at it again. The lighting IS from the Southwest! My brain was throwing everything upside down, that's why those rivers looked like they were on top of the ridges. Sorry.

[Dennis McClendon]

When I get this kind of situation, I like to drag-select that part of the line in and pull it over to the road, or, if necessary, redraw.

I do, too, but that's a lot of redrawing for every park in the eight-county Chicago metropolitan area.

I had to smile at this one this afternoon, though:

[OdeBode]

Nice work Matthew.

I didn't notice the parks/streets until Charles pointed them out. Seems like quite a bit of work for minimal payoff to me, but I'm fairly new to this.

I do agree with CHART on the bike shop symbol. Have you tried using an outline of an entire bicycle in the style of the cover? I can appreciate your challenge. Your map looks very professional while the cover is more playful. Have you experimented with using different fonts for the main map features and legend?

[Matthew Hampton]

When I get this kind of situation, I like to drag-select that part of the line in and pull it over to the road, or, if necessary, redraw.

I do, too, but that's a lot of redrawing for every park in the eight-county Chicago metropolitan area.

I had to smile at this one this afternoon, though:

That's a good one Dennis!

Having the ROW and the parks off-set is problematic. I placed my parks on my raster layer which makes it a bit challenging to fix (that and the sheer number in this 5 county area). If they were vectors you could also give 'em a little stroke to make up the difference and fill-in the gaps.