4 replies to this topic

[StuartDS]

Hey all! Comments appreciated - this is an attempt to develop a way of rapidly assessing where development is occurring within a settlement ( by assessing where new lots are being created), and representing existing lot unit densities.

Attached Files

•  Ct_Density_2_2_2.pdf   149.9K   84 downloads

[frax]

Looks interesting, but I always get weary at this 3D presentations, and I am not sure it adds much value really...

Think about what you want to communicate and how. For someone to read and interpret the map, I think it would also be important to see *why* development is higher in some areas.

How I would do it - traditional 2d heat map, with higher intensity colors for more development. Maybe divide the intensity into 5 classes. And then add some features that can help with interpretation - where are there lakes, woods, natural areas, industrial areas, roads, transportation (depending on what it looks like in your case).

[Clark Geomatics]

I agree with frax - just because you can create a "3D" representation, doesn't mean you should. Stuart, I think you'd be better served by using an easy-to-interpret heat map that allows people to understand relative density values. What you've presented here is, unfortunately, almost meaningless because we can't quantify the bar heights or figure out location relative to density due to the lack of labels/base map features. Your data range may benefit from using a logarithmic scale (maybe you did, it's hard to tell).

[sitesatlas]

In my opinion, a 3D map works for a flashy brochure cover or presentation slide, but that's about it. I rather like "View 1" in your PDF, but you can clearly see one of the big drawbacks with this kind of map: the tall columns obscure the lower data points located behind them. A 2D heat map as frax suggested is best in most cases.

[frax]

Also to keep in mind - as the tall bars obscure some other lower data points - in interpreting the map it is not only the high values that might be interesting, it could also be the lower values (and even more interesting - why is it lower in some areas!)