Jump to content


Poland - Forests

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

Igor Winiarczyk

Igor Winiarczyk


  • Validated Member
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:mapping, travel, photography
  • Poland

simple and informational. Or so I hope...

Attached Thumbnails

  • plforest2.jpg

Hans van der Maarel

Hans van der Maarel

    CartoTalk Editor-in-Chief

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Interests:Cartography, GIS, history, popular science, music.
  • Netherlands

simple and informational. Or so I hope...

Looks nice. I do have a few quick comments though:
- Align the text and legend box with the top and bottom edge of your map. This will make the overall layout look more pleasing and balanced.
- Regarding the legend, I don't think you actually need to explain that the grey line is the border of Poland.
- You may want to consider adding little boundary stalks to indicate where one neighbouring country ends and the other one starts. This will help your readers "place" the whole thing more easily. In a similar fashion, you may want to show the Baltic Sea as well.
- Some of your layout elements are fairly big and chunky. The arrows for example, and also the scale bar. Arrows could be half as wide easily, and still stand out (make sure they all start at the text box outline). Scalebar could be half or even a third as high, and maybe do it in 4 50km increments instead of 2 100km.

And a general comment: the output resolution seems to be a bit too low. Texts aren't exactly crisp when viewed at 100%. I'm betting this was done on purpose to reduce file size and it shouldn't be a problem if you export as PDF, but still it's worth looking into.

Hope this helps.
Hans van der Maarel - Cartotalk Editor
Red Geographics
Email: hans@redgeographics.com / Twitter: @redgeographics



    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Hangzhou, China
  • Interests:Cartography, GIS, Travel, Books, Music
  • China

I agree with Haans. And few things to add:

- You have Warsaw, but Poznań, Łódź, Kraków - if English names, then English names, if Polish then Polish.
- The text in the boxes could be reviewed (it's not wrong, doesn't feel very pleasant to read)
- Arrows point to a point on map, but forest is not a exactly a point feature... I would a little bit reconsider what do you want to communicate.

Map looks nice to me, but I think it needs some more work.



    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 778 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Canada

You've got a few of the text boxes on the map pointing to features that are close to the edge of the map. Why not move these text boxes off the map into the white space surrounding Poland? This way the reader gets an unencumbered view of most of the map. The one in the middle you might have to leave.



    Hall of Fame

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,130 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Oregon
  • United States

Not bad for starters. In addition to the other comments:
not sure you need a frame around the scale bar
would be nice to have the boundaries of the parks, especially the ones you're pointing to
I wonder if you could move the title off the map and into the text block - then you could increase the size of Poland in the map a bit
the text in the text block flows kind of oddly - for example, the second line has plenty of space after "century," and farther down there is a line that has "only" and lots of space
I'm having a hard time picking out urban area from forests on the map
I don't think you need Major city in the legend - isn't it sort of obvious on the map?
I'm wondering if you could do away with the legend entirely (before Dennis can chime in! ;) ) - or at least remove the word legend and only show the patch for forests - and put it into the text block, then you could get rid of the legend box
could maybe even open out the map frame, drop the text frame and include that text right on the map in the white space
somehow the arrows look a bit "cartoony", not really in keeping with the serious nature of the rest of the map

Dave Barnes
Map Geek



    Hall of Fame

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

Nice Igor - thanks for sharing.

What is your point with this map? To show scarcity or abundance or something else?

To highlight the scarcity of forests here are some options:
1. Quick option: Change yellow (farmland?) to a contrasting color. This would maximize the juxtapose and give the viewer an immediate visual message of forest fragmentation and threat.
Also adding urban areas (orange or red) would be nice.
2. Second Option: Identify protected vs 'at risk' forests. Show 'wild' areas - largely roadless or strictly protected. One way to do this would be to show a few forest classes: forests strictly protected, forests on other public lands and forests on private lands. This would immediate show readers the forests which are threatened in the near future.




    Ultimate Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Outdoors
  • Interests:Recreational Cartography
  • United States

I agree with the other comments, and will add a few additional.

Remove the text blocks and arrows from the map. They really have very little to do with "Poland's Forests" and they are blocking my view of the forest. "Can't see the forest for the text"

The scale bar should not be larger then the title.

Why are some bordering countries labeled and other are not? Does Poland not recognize these countries as independent nations?

If you must have a legend (which you don't), at least make sure the symbology matches. I don't see any major cities, but I see a lot of labeled red dots.

Overall I think that there could be a lot better use of space and balance.

Thanks for posting,
"Ah, to see the world with the eyes of the gods is geography--to know cities and tribes, mountains and rivers, earth and sea, this is our gift."
Strabo 22AD

Martin Gamache

Martin Gamache

    Ultimate Contributor

  • Associate Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington DC
  • Interests:History of Topographic Cartography
    Topographic Mapping
    History of Relief Depiction
    Thematic Cartography
    Demographic Cartography
    Cartographic techniques, methods, and tools
    Panoramic & Kite Photography
  • United States

Your notes refer to things that are not being shown on the map. I think you could add these lakes and park boundaries in a way that does not deter from the overall figure ground look of the forest cover. Either that or find something else to say in the notes? Perhaps a slight hue or saturation or value change for the park areas you are lighting would be effective. Ultimately is it a map about forest cover or parks?

I'm not sure what scale this is meant to be or what resolution your data is, but it would benefit from running a clumping routine and doing a little bit of cleaning up to generalize and minimize the pixelated look. It looks like output straight from the remote sensing classifier. That can be fine for a technical audience but for a more general audience I would clean it up a bit.

The border is too thick and heavy, it could be more subtle.

I would use a less saturated green but that's a matter of preference

Others have mentioned the notes. I agree, they are distracting and clumsy. I would move them off the map into the surrounding space if possible. If not possible then remove the long leaders and boxes and just use text. If you need leader lines, a small, thin line with no arrow is more subtle unless you need to indicate movement or flow. This does not appear to be the case.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users