Related to the parabolic map of the Moscow Metro, here’s a unique take on the Washington, DC Metro – as a spiral. A visually compelling image, and great at showing links between routes, but not actually that useful as a map.
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Amazingly creative way of re-imagining the system. Looks fantastic! Shows links between routes at transfer stations very effectively.
What we don’t like: Absolute lack of geography makes this almost totally useless as an actual map – according to it, all routes run parallel to each other in a spiral. Also implies that all routes are of an equal length, which they are not. While this map could be used to navigate the system if you knew the names of the stations you wanted to travel between, it tells you nothing about how those stations relate to the city around them. Transit maps often abstract geography, but general north/south/east/west relationships need to be shown in some form.
Our rating: Probably best to consider this as art – and good art! – than an actual usable map. As the author himself states, “My opinion is that it’s a map… it’s just not a good one.” Extra points for looking awesome and being creative. 3 stars.
Now this I like. This map takes Moscow’s famous Circle Line and straightens it out completely: all other lines then attach to it parabolically (becoming curved when before they were represented as a straight line). Great work, even if not that practical for real-world use.
I really appreciate transit maps that combine different modes of transit, and this map does just that – showing Metro, light rail, trams and commuter rail in a very clean, restrained manner. Coloured route lines (blue, orange and green) set the dense and important Metro network apart from the subsidiary light rail, tram and commuter rail routes, which are shown in grey and thin black lines. Zone information is displayed through a chilly looking cyan blue background. A complete absence of curves creates a very formal, stiff look to the map. One unusual feature is the way that station markers always remain horizontal or vertical, even when the route line is at 45 degrees – making the stations “slice through” such lines at a distinctive angle.
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Good information hierarchy through intelligent use of colour. Bi-lingual legend. I really like the way the Metro route lines fold over each other as they make a 90-degree turn – an unusual graphic device that works well and lends the map a unique look.
What we don’t like: Perhaps looks a little cold and sterile. The thin double black lines for commuter rail looks a little overly fussy in comparison to the clarity of the rest of the map, although I do like the way two parallel routes are represented by just three lines (the middle line being shared by the two routes).
Our rating: A very clean, solid transit map, if a little sterile. Three-and-a-half stars.
It must be the season for redesigning transit maps. Hot on the heels of NJ Transit’s disappointing new system map comes a new map for the Go Transit network that serves Toronto and Southern Ontario. And unlike that NJ Transit map, this one takes the opportunity to create something new, contemporary and exciting – and totally runs with it. Especially when it’s compared to their previous map, which was nothing short of terrible. The old map is cramped, old fashioned and ugly, while the new one is light, airy and modern.
Go Transit: New Map
Go Transit: Old Map
Have we been there? No.
What we like: A lovely, starkly linear diagram. Bus information is clear, but subsidiary to the train lines. Fits English and French text on without looking crowded.
What we don’t like: I don’t think that the train icon is really needed next to the line names on the map itself – the colours and the legend give enough indicators that these are the train lines. At first glance, the Highway 407 bus service is a little difficult to differentiate from normal routes.
Our rating: A massive improvement on the previous map, with a distinctive look and feel all its own. Four stars!
A few years old now – Sydney’s Chatswood to Epping rail line is missing – but a clever idea very well executed by Saatchi and Saatchi Australia. Station names are replaced by those of music artists.
If you’ve reached this page from a search engine hit, please note that this is not the official NJ Transit page, but an independent review of the map as it stood in 2011. If you want to see the current official map, then follow this link [PDF]. If you love transit maps and diagrams, then please stick around and read the review – and more – on this site!
This morning, an interesting tweet came across my desk: “NJ Transit Executive Director James Weinstein unveils new customer friendly rail system map at today’s board meeting” with a link to the new map. Always eager to check out a new transit map, I clicked through… and was incredibly underwhelmed by what I saw.
Far from being the paradigm of customer friendliness that was promised, this map comes across as sad, tired and amateur. It seems to have taken elements from many different transit maps and mashes them into one big mess. We have the thick route lines and giant circle transfer stations of Washington, DC Metro, icons for the lines similar to – but nowhere nearly as well executed – the Lisbon Metro, and different station symbols for each and every mode of transit.
Admittedly, this map faces some unusual challenges in that it shows a state-wide system, rather than just a smaller city. Because of this, some semblance of geography and distance between stations has to be shown. However, I feel that there has to be a better solution than this, where the light rail systems around Hoboken and Newark are crammed into a tiny space with miniscule station names, while vast amounts of space remain empty throughout the rest of the state.
The stylised geography also troubles me – what exactly happens to the Delaware River when it gets to Port Jervis? And why do we need to see the vast empty bottom part of the state, especially when it cuts an ugly swathe across the informational text at the base of the map.
Have we been there? Yes – I’ve caught the train from Newark Airport into New York Penn Station.
What we like: Ambitious scope, attempting to show all rail services in the state of New Jersey – NJ Transit, PATH, light rail systems, as well as an indication of connecting services in neighbouring states – MTA, SEPTA and stations serviced by Amtrak. This is the first real transit map I’ve seen with a QR code on it – I wonder what it does?
What we don’t like: Unfortunately, despite its best intentions, this map is hideous. Almost everything – from the icons and colours chosen for the main routes, to the typography, to the clumsy treatment of the geography, to the enormous circles used for transfer stations, even the spacing of the stations – looks amateur and poorly thought out. Suffers even more from having to include every logo of every separate transit agency.
Our rating: A hugely wasted opportunity to create something memorable and exciting. One-and-a-half stars.
Colour blindness affects a small but significant percentage of the population, mainly males. It is estimated that around 7 to 8 percent of men are red-green colour blind (the most common type of colour blindness), while less than one percent of women are. Strangely enough, I knew a girl in high school who was colour blind, but I digress…
Washington DC Metro Map
London Underground Map
Official Paris Metro Map
Unofficial “Geo-Accurate”Paris Metro Map
Transit maps, as informational design, should pay attention to how colour blind users perceive them. Shown above are a few examples of transit maps which have been run through a Photoshop filter called Vischeck which simulates the effects of colour blindness. The left half of each image is a simulation of red-green colour blindness, while the right half is the standard map.
On a simple map with just a few lines, as shown in the Washington DC Metro, things aren’t usually a problem as the routes are easily distinguishable from each other.
The London Underground map does an excellent job of using contrast to differentiate between adjacent route lines, so usability is hardly impaired at all. Look at the northern Circle Line where pink, yellow and burgundy lines become grey (mid-dark), yellow (light) and black (dark) – all very distinct from each other.
The next step up in complexity is the Paris Metro map. Its subdued pastel tones actually hold up surprisingly well – again, by ensuring that adjacent route lines have plenty of contrast between them. Note also that the background colour doesn’t shift in tone at all, giving predictable results for the routes themselves.
Compare the official Paris Metro map to the unofficial one featured yesterday, and things are quite different. The low contrast colour palette used causes many of the routes to turn into very similar shades of yellow and blue, and the background colour shifts completely from green-black to blue-black. While it is certainly still possible to trace the routes, it’s definitely harder on the eye to do so. And as I said yesterday, the workaround solution of tiny “rune” markers on each line is way too small to be of any practicable use.
In the end, a diagrammatic map will almost always be usable by a color blind person, simply because the simplified form will make it easy to trace routes, but more care must be taken the more complex the system becomes. Labelling end points of lines with a letter or number may also help where there are many route colours. A simple plugin like Vischeck allows a designer to quickly gauge how their work may be perceived by those with colour blindness, allowing them to tweak their chosen colours for optimal usage by all.
Further to yesterday’s post, here’s a new unofficial map of the Paris Metro that’s been hot on the interwebs over the last few days. Unlike the official RATP diagram, this version places all the stations in their exact geographical locations, although I suspect the route lines have been tweaked between those points to create more graceful curves than in reality. Also unlike the official map, it doesn’t attempt to show tram services or mainline train routes, removing some valuable information.
According to the author, the benefits of his map include showing where it’s easier to walk instead of transferring to another train (he uses the excellent example of transferring at St-Michele to get to Cité station, when you’d really be better off just getting off at St-Michele and walking over the Seine to the same point) and enhanced zone information (it’s often cheaper to catch the Metro to a similar point and remain in Zone 1, when the RER station may be in Zone 2 or 3!)
The map also makes use of Ethan Schoonover’s Solarized colour theme, a set of well-designed low contrast colours specifically designed for on-screen viewing. However, with a transit map, our eyes often need contrast to allow patterns to be discerned and routes to be followed, so I’m not entirely sure about its application in this case.
The author also claims that his map is good for color-blind users, but I’m not entirely convinced that his solution – tiny, rune-line marks on each line on either side of station marker – are actually any more effective than the big line numbers at the end of each line. More on this tomorrow.
Have we been there? Yes.
What we like: Overall effect looks gorgeous. A lot of thought and theory has been applied to this work. Released under a Creative Commons license, which is very generous.
What we don’t like: Labelling of stations gets messy in the centre of Paris. Zone areas look very blobby: these could have been smoothed out a little more. The perfect circle described by the eastern end of Line 7B goes against the author’s stated goals of accuracy and comes across as an affectation. Colour-blind route markers are too small to be of any use.
Our rating: Interesting, well-executed, but flawed. Not as good as the real thing. Three-and-a-half stars.
If you visit Paris, you need to use the Metro to get around, so it’s a good thing that its map is up to the task. It took Paris a long time to come around to a diagrammatic approach (Harry Beck created two versions on spec, but both were rejected), and earlier diagrams were not as successful as this – one had all vertical lines set at a jaunty 15-degree angle, which made the whole city look like it was leaning to the right (a subject for a future post, I think!).
Have we been there? Yes, in 1997 and again in 2003. In 2003, I was in Paris for almost three weeks and used the Metro every single day – it’s one of my favourite transit systems in the world. Fast, cheap (even more so if you buy carnets instead of single tickets), reliable and almost always convenient – the system is incredibly dense, with stations just about everywhere you look.
What we like: The sheer amount of information presented in a very clear, concise and ordered manner: Metro, RER commuter rail, tram lines, the Montmartre funicular, even an indication of mainline train services, all in an understated, very French, pastel colour scheme. This map proves beyond doubt that you can present all type horizontally in a transit diagram if you really try – not one line of type is angled, and it rarely cuts across route lines. Interchanges, especially between different modes of transport, are very clear and well thought out.
What we don’t like: Station names on the tram lines are a little small, and the closeness of stations on the T1 (blue) line in the upper left causes it to look like an “under construction” dashed line. The pastel color palette does lead to a few very similar colours (mainly greens), but ultimately this isn’t a huge problem as the route lines themselves are pretty easy to follow and the similar colours generally only cross each other, not follow the same path.
Our rating: An extraordinarily elegant diagram (and very evocative of Parisian style – this map definitely has a sense of place about it), especially considering the amount of information it packs in. Five stars.
A beautiful example of an abstracted rectilinear diagram – everything is evenly spaced, with subtle curves and a lovely complementary rounded typeface. The colours in this diagram work wonderfully well, with “traditional” route colours of Blue, Yellow, Green and Red being given a pastel twist and lovely icons that fit in with Lisbon’s maritime history perfectly. An excellent bi-lingual key and icons pack this map with useful information and all type is set horizontally. The overall effect is light and spacious – and very welcoming.
Have we been there? No.
What we like: The translucent effect as the lines pass over each other is lovely. The icons for each of the lines are beautiful, reflecting the former names of the lines themselves: Blue Line = Seagull, Yellow Line = Sunflower, Green Line = Caravel, Red Line = Orient (or East).
What we don’t like: Perhaps not enough geographical cues for out-of-town visitors – the abstractness of the diagram makes it a little too divorced from reality and perhaps difficult to use for sightseeing. The Metro logo seems placed in a very odd location – I think over underneath the “Network Diagram” text on the left may have worked better.
Our rating: Abstract and rational, yet still lovely and very welcoming. Beautifully designed, but at a slight cost to those who don’t use the system every day. Four stars.
