A good example of how something that’s probably perfectly clear to locals can be totally confusing to foreign visitors. The first obstacle is obviously the Cyrillic text, which automatically makes things very tricky for non-natives. Now, I’ve spent quite a bit of time translating and cross-referencing the text here with a Moscow Metro map, and I think I’ve got it worked out — but this isn’t exactly a luxury that you would have when you’re down in a busy station, trying to work out where to go next.
Basically, this assembly shows transfers to other lines that are available along the Arbatsko–Pokrovskaya (Number 3) line: the dark blue colour of this line runs across the top, and three station names are visible: Kurskaya (Курская) — where you can transfer to the 5 and 10; Ploshchad Revolyutsii (Пло́щадь Револю́ции) — with a transfer to the 2; and Arbatskaya (Арба́тская) — which has interchanges with the 1, 4 and 9. Interestingly, you can also transfer to Line 1 at Ploshchad Revolyutsii, but this is not shown here. I’m guessing that this photo was taken at Kurskaya station, just from the four golden letters — ская — that can be seen at the top left of the picture.
Each line map underneath these station names helpfully tells you the name of the station that you transfer to (it’s not unusual for interchange stations in Moscow to have different names for each line). Less helpfully, it then presents a list of every station on that line from beginning to end, except for the one you are transferring at: which means you can’t see where on the the line that station is.
For example, on the Line 10 list shown at the left, the transfer station you would be using — Chkalovskaya (Чка́ловская) — should be in the fifth position, but is instead completely absent from the list. Needless to say, this isn’t great informational design, especially if you’re used to those reassuring “You Are Here“ markers that you see in many other transit systems around the world.
Obviously, these line maps aren’t the only guidance a traveller would have in the Metro — a really good map and an idea of where you wanted to go would be necessities — but they could definitely be a lot better.
This material was sent to me via email by Dennis McClendon, who runs Chicago CartoGraphics, a design firm in the Windy City that specialises in maps and information graphics. His email – which outlines his role in the development of the Chicago “L” map as used in the CTA system map brochure (the first link on this page) – is so fascinating that I’m basically reproducing it in its entirety below. In effect, Dennis is Transit Maps’ first guest writer!
A little inside history on the CTA map:
I took over the CTA system map (the folded paper citywide map showing all buses and trains) in 1995. The “cover side” of the map was produced by an internal graphics department and had all the bus schedule info, how to ride info, and a diagrammatic train map.
Transit maps are a longtime passion, and I had quite a collection from around the world. I thought the diagrammatic train map CTA was using (Image 1 above) was embarrassing, and asked permission to redesign it. I was told they’d “take a look.” So I spent a Saturday trying a couple of different approaches. Since the 1980s, I’ve had a London Underground Journey Planner on my office wall for inspiration, so I first tried a very Beck-like approach for grins (Image 2). But it just didn’t feel like it belonged to Chicago.
I had a hazy memory of a map CTA had used, probably only on carcards, in the late 1970s or early 1980s, but there were no examples of that left around the system. Nonetheless, that memory guided me to try fat color lines with white circles for stations. One of the main innovations I wanted to introduce was the “hollow dumbbell” to show transfer points in an instantly comprehensible way. At the time, CTA was using a circled T to indicate transfer points—and those survived as a sort of belt-and-suspenders thing.
One strange thing about CTA is that different departments do maps for the paper system map, maps displayed at train stations, and the maps over the doors in the trains (carcards). I only produced the one on the paper system map, which was also provided to guidebook publishers (and soon turned into neckties and shower curtains, and used on a variety of marketing and branding materials). CTA soon imitated my diagram, however, for the station maps and carcard maps (though they would not give up the “T for transfer” on the carcards). The typeface began as Helvetica, which has a strong heritage at CTA, then changed to Frutiger Condensed (Image 3) on recommendation of an outside consultant (to my delight, since I’m a big Frutiger fan); then reverted to Helvetica after that design firm disappeared.
One particularly tricky thing in Chicago is the orthogonal nature of the city, whose gridded streets run absolutely straight for 25 miles. Chicago has five rapid transit stations called “Western,” and there’s a natural inclination to see them line up. That limits the spatial distortion that can be introduced, yet the downtown area has many closely spaced stations. CTA always preferred, therefore, to have an enlarged inset for the Loop area. I’ve always maintained a “unitary” version (Image 4), however, that I use for other tourism clients, sometimes in other typefaces. I also figured it would let me sidestep copyright issues with CTA.
I lost the CTA system map contract to another company in 2007 (though I recently got the RTA contract). Meanwhile, Graham Garfield at CTA assumed oversight of all customer information, finally putting all the different maps under one boss. Among many other things, he’s a design aficionado, but I don’t always agree with his decisions. He put the highly accurate gridded maps into the stations rather than the diagrammatic map; I think his feeling was that it helps give riders more context of the city around that rail system. (The latest version of this map was reviewed on Transit Mapshere)
This not-so-diagrammatic map (Image 5) is the one on the [brochure PDF on the] CTA website these days as well. The carcards, however, still retain the diagrammatic look.
An element I always thought was important was having the station names in the same color as the lines, so I was surprised that the most recent system map changed that. The wheelchair icons got fussier, and readers are now insulted with the notation “Map Not to Scale.” As a cartographer, I also cringe to see “Lake Michigan” not in italics. I asked Graham about that over lunch recently, and he mumbled something about italics being harder to read.
Want to help support the site? Head over to the Transit Maps print store and get yourself a beautiful original transit map design, or a lovingly restored reproduction vintage map from our extensive collection. All printed on high-quality 230gsm art paper with archival-quality inks.
One of the loveliest reinventions of the London Tube Map I’ve seen so far – simply red thread stitched onto rice paper. It’s bigger than it looks: 100cm wide by 30cm deep, so it would certainly look impressive on a wall!
Simply gorgeous mid-century poster designed for British Rail’s North Eastern Division by the prolific graphic artist, Reginald Lander (1913–1982). Yorkshire has never looked better, or so warm… look at all those people in bathing suits frolicking in the hot sun!
The simplified map suits the angular design of the underlying painted scene perfectly, a real synthesis of design and art coming together as a cohesive whole.
The section of line between Pickering and Whitby via Grosmont is today preserved as the North Yorkshire Moors Railway, with the beautiful station at Goathland the highlight. Depending on your age, you might recognise it from Simply Red’s video clip for “Holding Back the Years” in 1985, as Aidensfield station in the long-running British TV series Heatbeat, or even as Hogsmeade station from the Harry Potter movies.
Our rating: Simply stunning. They don’t make ‘em like this any more. 5 stars!
Source: National Railway Museum/Flickr – account no longer active
Very shiny representation of the inner part of Sydney’s rail network. Design-wise, it doesn’t stray too far from the look of the official map (Sept. 2012, 3.5 stars), although I’m not quite sure why the route line that represents the peak-only East Hills services heading up through Sydenham suddenly turns northwards before it reaches Redfern. The labels for Circular Quay and St. James stations could also be much better aligned with their respective ticks.
Technically, there should also be a second tick mark at Newtown, Ashfield, Croydon, Homebush and Flemington stations, as they all serve the South Line as well as the Bankstown line. Their non-inclusion probably stems from technical or structural reasons here, however, so I’ll let it slide.
Would probably look great in one of those super-white, extra-minimalistic houses, although it looks like a bugger to keep clean.
When I was at Miniatur Wunderland in Hamburg (the largest model railway in the world), I found a tiny rendition of the Hamburg subway map in one of the models. It was a very detailed map, although my photo is blurry because it was so close up.
Transit Maps says:
Looks just like the real thing! It’s probably a tie between this map and this generic one for smallest subway map I’ve seen yet. Unless someone’s etched a Tube Map on a grain of rice with a laser just because they could?
Dear Cameron, I heard you also feature the worst transit maps on your blog – and by “worst”, I mean “worst of the worst”. If that’s right, I’d like to hear your opinion of this map by Emir Haračić. It shows the transit network of Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and appears in Sarajevo Navigator, quite a popular tourist guide.
Basically, I say that such a beautiful city as Sarajevo and the first electric streetcar on the Balkans really don’t deserve such an ugly map. We’ve got amateurly drawn route lines, “mega-stations” with tons of linked circles (just look at the “Park” station), and text flying all around the canvas.
But wait! If you think that’s already bad, you might want to look at the official – yes, official – map given out by Sarajevo’s transit company (link no longer active). I think you might even consider a negative rating here…
Transit Maps says:
Judging by the official map (which is a next-to-useless abomination and would certainly deserve the lowest possible rating), this one seems to have been born out of desperation for something better. And while I can’t fault that desire, this map really does make navigation of Sarajevo’s transit system much harder than it should be.
If there was ever a map that needed route lines to collapse down or overlay each other when they share the same track or road, it’s this one. As this diagram from Wikipedia shows, the Sarajevo Tramway is basically one route with different service patterns running on it, and could be simplified a lot more that it is shown here. As it is, the central loop part of the map is almost incomprehensible.
My biggest problem with the depiction of the tram routes is the way they “step down” along the route instead of following the same path along their entire length. For an example, follow the “4” from right to left across the map. It goes for a few stops, and then drops down to the next line, because one of the routes underneath it in the “stack” of lines has ended. This makes following a particular route from one end to the other across the map incredibly difficult and could have been easily avoided with some careful planning.
The other really big problem with the map is the typography. All-capitals, condensed sans serif type set at multiple angles is not easy to read: all the letter forms look very similar, and it can be hard to work out which label belongs to which stop in crowded parts of the map. The resolution of the image as found online also does the type no favours: the image is only 1024px wide, so smaller type like the route numbers contained within each line becomes very indistinct.
Finally, there’s a fifth colour on the map (magenta) that’s not explained in the legend. It’s only used for the “31E” bus route, so there’s something different about it that that we’re not being told about…
Our rating: Trying to fill a void created by the lack of an viable official alternative, this map means well, but is gravely hampered by myriad problems. Really can’t give this one more than half a star.
After seeing the aerial maps of the New York City Subway system and Portland’s Rail system, I decided to try it out on my home city of Salt Lake City! Granted that at the end of the year, it will have three light rail lines, one street car line and one commuter rail line it is even simpler than Portland’s at this scale. (Not pictured in this photo is the Sugarhouse Streetcar line). But seeing as when I move to SLC two years ago, the green line in the lower left corner and the purple line (Frontrunner commuter rail) from downtown to the right side of the picture didn’t even exist yet, this system is making a lot of progress in a very short time.
Transit Maps says:
Not a lot to add to this, except to agree about the rapid progress that SLC has made with its rail transit. Now, if only they’d fix their darn maps…
An updated look at my futureNYCSubway proposal using an expanded Vignelli map.
More excellent work from Andrew Lynch (aka vanshnookenraggen) – this time, an astoundingly well-considered analysis of future plans for the New York Subway. The resultant map is quite beautiful as well, based as it is off Massimo Vignelli’s 2008/Weekender revision of his classic 1970s map.
I strongly encourage you to click through to Andrew’s website and read the full rationale behind this map: this isn’t just “fantasy”, it’s a well-balanced view of the potential future of the subway in New York. You can also download a PDF of the map for personal use (sweet!).
