The detail in this is nothing short of amazing. The subway map as art, indeed.
Art: “Paris” by Paula Scher
Official Map: St. Louis MetroLink Light Rail, 2011
Not every transit map has the multiple lines and complex interchanges of the London Underground, Paris Metro or New York Subway. Many systems have but a few lines which interact with each other in very simple ways: either crossing at a central point, or – as in this map’s case – sharing a common alignment for most of their length. But just because the map is simple doesn’t mean the designer shouldn’t pay attention to the small details. If anything, they should pay more attention, as the errors become easier to spot!
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Clean design, nice and airy. I’ll never be totally convinced by Gill Sans on transit maps – it’s too idiosyncratic, and it looks worse the bolder it gets – but it does a passable job here.
What we don’t like: Attention to those small details! For some reason, the distance between station names and their dots on the route lines varies quite a lot. To illustrate, compare “East Riverfront” and “Emerson Park” stations. The latter’s name is much higher above the route line for no discernible reason. That they are only separated by one other station just makes the difference more obvious.
The logic behind using a smaller type size for the second line in a station name is questionable. It works well when there’s an obvious subtitle in the name, such as UM-ST. LOUIS (North), but ARCH-LACLEDE’S (Landing) makes no sense, while RICHMOND (Heights) is just weird. And is it just me, or is the size of the subtitle font inconsistent?
Finally, I find the inclusion of the “P” in the icon for “Primary Transfer Station” brings some ambiguity to it. Does the “P” stand for “Parking” (as it does elsewhere), or does it mean “Primary” in this instance? Good information design should remove ambiguity, not introduce it – even if it is a minor instance like this.
Our rating: Clear and easy to understand, but let down by a lack of attention to detail. Three stars.
Source: Official Metro Transit website
Art: Tube Map Made from Straws by Kyle Bean
File this under “A” for “awesome”!
Here’s Zone 1 of the London Underground map made entirely from drinking straws. I particularly like the use of striped straws to simulate the double-stroked DLR and Overground lines from the real map. Clever work from artist Kyle Bean, who has heaps of amazing work on his website.
Source: Kyle Bean
Historical Map: George Dow Diagram of LNER Great Northern Suburban Services, 1929
Almost everyone credits Harry Beck with “inventing” the diagrammatic transit map in 1933 with his iconic London Underground map. But the diagram form had already been in use for a number of years before that, as shown in this delightful 1929 diagram for LNER suburban services out of London’s Kings Cross station to points north. It was designed by George Dow, who created many such diagrams for the LNER. His son, Andrew Dow, wrote a book about his father’s work, aptly titled, “Telling The Passenger Where To Get Off” – which is exactly what a transit map is all about.
Have we been there? I have caught the train from Kings Cross to Stevenage, but the modern trains have little of the style and charm of 1920s LNER steam trains.
What we like: All the elements of modern transit design are on show in this diagram — straightened route lines, clear labels, interchange station symbols (here charmingly called “exchange stations”), and a complete absence of geography. This diagram is all about connections — where to get on and where to get off – nothing more. That it looks elegant and sophisticated, full of 1920s style, makes it all the better. The typography is particularly nice, especially the little dots under the “T” in St. Albans.
What we don’t like: In reality, Stevenage is almost due north of London, so one supposes the curious slant of the routes to the north west is because of space limitations (I believe this map was used in train carriages themselves). A little rough around the edges in parts, but this almost adds to its charm.
Our rating: A fantastic look at the early days of diagrammatic transit maps, and one that shows that Harry Beck was not quite the lone pioneer that many people laud him as. Four-and-a-half stars.
Source: George Rose’s website
Official Map: Copenhagen S-Tog Map, 2011
Some transit maps are geographically based, others are diagrams. But what happens when you get a map with too much diagram? That’s what we have with Copenhagen’s S-Tog (S-Train) map: it looks gorgeous, but at what cost to usability?
Have we been there? Yes, but I didn’t use the S-Tog system. I arrived and left by long-distance trains from/to Berlin, and caught a regional train out to Roskilde to visit the Viking Ship Museum ( an absolute must-see!)
What we like: Stunningly slick European design. A lovely distinctive typeface (the PDF tells me it is called “Via Office”). The DSB logo at bottom right – a modern reworking of a winged wheel by the look of things – is gorgeous.
What we don’t like: The stark diagrammatic network on a simple grey background may look fantastic, but I feel it has gone too far. There’s absolutely no reference points to guide someone unfamiliar with the city – Copenhagen is made up of canals, rivers and islands, but none of them are visible. Even the main railway station – the hub of the network – doesn’t stand out: it looks exactly like very other station. No reference is made to connections to the Metro service out to the airport. The numbers on the map, which refer to Denmark’s convoluted zone system, make absolutely no sense to those unfamiliar with it.
Our rating: Looks great, but sacrifices context and valuable location information to achieve it. Glossy but lacking in substance. Three stars.
Source: DSB S-Tog site
Fantasy Map: Deutsche Bahn ICE Network as a U-Bahn Map
Clever work here from the German office of Ogilvy Advertising, taking the familiar iconography of a typical German-styled U-Bahn map and applying it — and its associated promises of rapid, frequent service — to the Germany-wide ICE (high-speed train) network.
My only problem with this work is that the shape of the network bears little resemblance to Germany itself, probably because of the landscape format of the bilboard.
Source: Viralbuzz.de and Design Made in Germany
Historical Maps: Man-Made Philadelphia, 1972
Philadelphia Rail Network, 1972 
Philadelphia Bus Network, 1972 
Philadelphia Highways, 1972 
Philadelphia Growth, 1776-1976
One last view of Philadelphia transit via these amazing diagrams from a 1972 book by Richard Saul Wurman from the MIT Press, “Man-Made Philadelphia”, now sadly out of print. As well as the train network, there’s also buses, highways and the growth of the city. Definitely loving the early 70s mimimalism design vibe to these. Looks like they were all produced specially for the book.
Source: rjwhite/Flickr
Historical Map: Philadelphia SEPTA Map, c. 1979-1980
A reblog by cranialdetritus of yesterday’s featured SEPTA map asked whether I had covered the SEPTA maps of the 1970s yet. I hadn’t, and tracking down an image proved a little tricky. The best I can find is a modern redrawing of the map from around 1979-1980 – credit to Lucius Kwok of Felt Tip Software for this work. It seems to be a quite accurate rendition, as the photo below – showing part of a very similar sign that is still in situ – attests.
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Compared to today’s SEPTA map, this is gorgeous. It always makes me sad when beautiful maps are replaced by something nowhere near as good. Of course, the two maps don’t show exactly the same services, so it’s not an apples to apples comparison, but many lessons could be learned from this. The lovely simplicity of the rivers stands out the most, and the interchange station network downtown is deftly handled as well. Commuter rail, which is a horrible, blobby mess on the current map, almost looks graceful here – and it’s a bigger, more complex network!
What we don’t like: The poor old trolleys get short shrift again, with some arrows pointing in the general direction they go.
Our rating: So superior to the current map that it hurts. Four stars.
Source: Map: Felt Tip Software (link no longer active); Photo: S. Thurmovik (link no longer active)
Official Map: Philadelphia SEPTA Network, 2011
After quite a few stellar maps, it’s time to show what I consider to be one of the least successful transit maps in current use in the US. To put it bluntly, SEPTA’s map is an unappealing, jumbled mess and certainly does not get me excited to use their system (a major plus point in my internal scoring system).
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Deserves credit for attempting to show so many different modes on one map as well as connections to other, unrelated, services – Amtrak, PATCO and the River Line in Trenton, NJ. Pity it’s so ugly.
What we don’t like: Oh dear, where to begin?
Huge blobby terminus stations on the regional rail lines. Incredibly tight spacing between stations on the 101 trolley line. Compare the dense 101 and 102 trolleys with the other trolley lines, which peter out into unconvincing arrows after a few stops – mainly because the designer couldn’t work out how to fit them in the space allocated, I think. Where is Port Richmond, anyway? This map sure doesn’t tell me.
No visual distinction that the Red PATCO line isn’t part of SEPTA’s services (you have to read the legend to find that out).
Yellow “Free Interchange” symbols are U-G-L-Y. Curves on the Regional Rail lines are inconsistent and technically deficient (look at the one heading north to the left of 30th Street Station and how it’s been hideously bent to avoid the word “Amtrak”).
While the rivers have been rendered in diagrammatic form, the map still wants to show every single little twist and turn in the shoreline – overwrought and unnecessary (as well as badly drawn – lots of non-45-degree angles can be seen).
Finally, this map totally fails the color-blind test: almost everything ends up yellow or blue with very little contrast between adjacent lines and nothing on the map apart from colour to link the routes to the legend.
Our rating: I call it “the blobby map”. Hideous and unwelcoming. One-and-a-half stars.
Source: Official SEPTA website
Fantasy Map: Appalachian Trail Subway
From Stonebrown Design comes this clever “subway” map of the famous Appalachian Trail, a hiking path that stretches some 2,200 miles from Georgia to Maine. Normally confined to detailed topographical maps, here it has been simplified to its very basic elements — a path, stops along the way and state lines. Clever work.
Have we been there? No, but I have a friend who thru-hiked the whole trail and loved every second of it.
What we like: Clever adaptation of the familiar subway iconography for a very different purpose. Especially like the clarification between on-trail and off-trail “stops”, an important distinction for hikers.
What we don’t like: Not a huge amount to dislike. Even the angled text – my usual pet peeve – works well in this instance, allowing text to sit cleanly within each relevant state. Hikers might complain that it doesn’t give any indication of elevation: I’ve heard some of those mountains along the way are a hard slog!
Our rating: Clever and witty reworking of standard subway design and iconography. They aren’t selling posters of this yet, but they really should be. Four stars.
Source: Stonebrown Design