We’ve covered to-scale maps on Transit Maps before (See here and here), but I do really like this poster of every subway/rapid transit system in the world – 140 in all – to scale, organised by system size by Neil Freeman. Posters are available from his website for $20 plus postage – a late addition to the Holiday Gift Guide!
Source: Fake is the New Real
Following on from my previous post, here’s an unofficial map for the Mexico City Metro that makes full use of the Lance Wyman icons. It’s designed by Richard Archambault, who also works on the essential Jetpack for WordPress.
As can be seen from the archival photo above, the Wyman design team explored a purely iconic treatment of the Metro map, apparently eschewing station names altogether. Admittedly, the system was much simpler back then, with only lines 1, 2 and 3 present in the mockup as shown on the wall.
As we know, the official map has since moved away from this approach and no longer features the icons at all. So what would a modern Mexico City Metro map that used icons look like? That’s what Richard’s map sets out to show, and it’s a surprising contrast to the disappointing official map.
Richard has painstakingly vectorised all the icons (around 200 or so!) from the bitmap versions available on the STC’s website to use in the map, and I really appreciate the way that he’s made them big and bold – it’s certainly very evocative of Wyman’s original concept.
The “big and bold” approach almost forces the map into being more evenly spaced and less cramped in the centre of the map when compared to the official map – the icons always take up a certain amount of space, which in turn creates space around them. Richard also keeps his route lines as straight as possible, which suits the minimalist aesthetic of the map nicely. Yes, there’s some odd angles here and there, but I don’t really find them distracting in the context of the whole map. Richard also includes the Tren Ligero line in its entirety – nicely differentiated by placing its icons in circles – something the official map relegates to a vague arrow and caption.
The labelling of stations is perhaps a little pedestrian (a version with no labels at all like the Wyman concept would be interesting), and the line numbers at the end of each line could perhaps do with a little bit of differentiation from the station icons next to them. They’re the same size, shape and colour, and can be read as an extra station at first glance. Reducing them in size, or perhaps having them as white shapes with the text and a border stroke in the line colour could do the trick.
Best of all, Richard’s map has been featured in the new edition of Mark Ovenden’s Transit Maps of the World. Having gotten no response from the STC regarding inclusion of their official map, Mark reached out to Richard and basically commissioned him to update his map for use in the book. Awesome!
Our rating: Shows that an iconic approach to the Mexico City Metro is perfectly valid, and certainly produces a more attractive and usable map than the official one. Three stars!
Side note: I’ve only just noticed that the icon for the “Oceania” station is a kangaroo, while that of “Deportiva Oceania” is a koala with a soccer ball. Australia represent!
Strangely, I’ve never talked about this system map on the blog before. So this is the map that’s available for download as a PDF on the STC’s website and basically, it’s a giant pile of spaghetti thrown on the page.
The centre of the map is so cramped and crowded that labels almost overlap each other as well as the route lines. No explanation is given for the “MB” icon near some stations (it’s to represent an interchange with nearby Metrobus services, but nothing on the map tells you that). I’ve also never seen a route line that’s two-toned, like the silver-and-green Line B, and I’m not sure I like it very much.
However, the real shame with this map is the complete absence of the famous Lance Wyman-designed icons for each of the stations. They’re utilised extensively on strip maps on trains and at stations, so it’s more than a little odd that they’re not leveraged in the map at all. More on that soon.
Our rating: A really disappointing map, hardly representative of one of the world’s great metro systems. One-and-a-half stars.
Source: STC official site
Words cannot express just how much I love this beautiful, beautiful map by Maxwell Roberts, whose work I’ve featured on the blog many times previously. I had the privilege of seeing this map “in the flesh” at the New York Transit Museum event I attended earlier this month, and it looks even more impressive as an actual print.
The map is inspired by the work of the famous architect and designer, Frank Lloyd Wright – most obviously by his stained glass work – and it’s a wonderful homage to his style, especially regarding the typographical and colour choices. And it actually works really nicely as a map as well! I note with pleasure that repeated station names – Cicero, Pulaski, Harlem, etc. – are placed properly relative to the city’s grid, which is a very nice touch indeed. The Loop inset is nicely handled, although you could perhaps argue that the station name labels for the Loop stations on the main map are therefore redundant and could perhaps be omitted for clarity.
Personally, I find some of Max’s transit maps to be very technical explorations of design and usability theory – fascinating, well-drawn and very worthy, but sometimes a little dry in character. This however, is art, and I think it’s simply gorgeous. 5 stars!
Prints of this map – and many others – are available on Max’s website from £30 for UK orders, and £36 (about $55) for international orders. Consider this added to the 2015 gift guide!
Source: Tube Map Central (Maxwell Roberts’ website)
Via: parismetromap:
The New Paris Metro Map is developing. The final version will be soon… within one to two months.
An RATP logo for the blog this originated from, but surely this is not a reworking of the actual official Métro map? Anyone have any more details on this at all?
The idea of making a circle out of Lines 2 and 6 is interesting, but the spaghetti-like tangle of routes contained within that circle is quite frightening. Definitely a work in progress, whoever is working on it… station dots out of place, line numbers missing, etc. The curved shape described by stations where three or more lines meet is interesting, but I’m less sure about the multi-coloured gradient strokes used on them… it makes these major stations blend in with the surrounding lines, when they should stand out and be immediately visible.
It’ll certainly be interesting to see the final completed map, that’s for sure!
EDIT: In world record time, I’ve been told that the map is an unofficial work by graphic designer and art director, Constantine Konovalov. Well, that clears things up nicely!
Submitted by James, who says:
My redesign of the DC metro system, with the purple line and silver lines in their completed states. I wanted to do a Vignelli-style map of the system in DC, which I believe complements the relative simplicity of the system well.
Regarding the abolition of the red line kink on the western arm: I think one bend to indicate the kink is still sufficient and recognizable.
Transit Maps says:
James is right when he says that the minimalism of a Vignelli-style map matches the relative simplicity of the system, and overall, this is a very competent and pleasing map. However, there’s a few problems with it that I can see.
First, while the subdued colour scheme looks nice, it does reduce the contrast between the route lines quite a bit. While this is probably okay for regular users, colour-blind readers are really going to struggle. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that James hasn’t provided an alternative way to distinguish between the lines on the map. To a colour-blind user, the Red and Green lines look almost identical – without a legend to the lines and something similar to the real map’s “RL” and “GL” bullets, working out which is which for a colour-deficient rider unfamiliar with the system is going to be very hard work indeed. Personally, I’d replace James’ fare information table (which would require a reprint of the map every time the fares went up, and is information probably best left to ticket vending machines anyway) with a properly colour-coded legend to the lines.
I also think that James could have pushed the minimalism of the map further to truly embrace Vignelli’s principles of unadorned diagrammatic map design. He’s straightened out the infamous kink in the western leg of the Red Line and shows the Silver Line as being laser-straight (which it isn’t), but he’s retained the little wiggle in the Green/Yellow lines at Columbia Heights. Vignelli would almost certainly have argued that the wiggle is inconsequential information in relation to how the nodes of the network fit together and would have excised it.
Similarly, the very uneven spacing of stations along the Purple Line is something that I believe Vignelli would have addressed, even if it meant moving Fort Totten further south and respacing other stations to facilitate it. Remember: this is a diagram, not a map! As much as possible, an even, harmonious distance between stops is desired. To that end, I’d even advocate removing county lines from the map to simplify things even further: the District Diamond and the Potomac are really enough to orient users. However, if James chooses to retain county lines, then he needs to add one for Loudoun County just before the Dulles Airport station on the Silver Line.
The diagonal label for Federal Center SW looks really out of place among all those lovely horizontal labels in the centre of the map, but I’d probably make all of the labels for the Purple Line between Silver Spring and College Park angled – a necessary evil! – instead of flipping the last two back to horizontal, which kind of upsets the reading flow. Labels should always be in the “expected” place to make things easy for the reader.
Don’t get me wrong, I really like this map! However, usability for all users is a key consideration in transit map design, and homages to a particular style can be tricky to pull off well – especially something as definitive as Massimo Vignelli’s minimalist design approach.
Maps: it’s why we’re all here, isn’t it? Here’s a selection of some great map posters to get up on your wall this Christmas.
Stations & Lines by data visualisation designer Nicholas Rougeux. A lovely representation of all rail rapid transit stations in selected cities and the route lines that serve them. Boston, Chicago, London, New York, Paris and Washington DC. 24″ x 36″ posters for $28.60 on Nick’s website.
Also by Nick, MetroDots – a typographical treatment of station names with coloured dots representing the lines that call at each one. Chicago, London, New York and San Francisco. 24″ x 36″ posters for $28.60 on Nick’s website.
Michael Tyznik’s fantastic Game of Thrones Westeros transit map. Prints from $30 on InPRNT, although I’d recommend the larger sizes. See also his other GoT map of the “Known World” and an intriguing new map inspired by the fantasy gaming world of Tamriel.
Jug Cerovic’s range of standardised “INAT” transit maps are available as prints over on RedBubble. Small 12″ x 12″ prints start at just $15, up to $56 for large 30″ x 30″ prints.
The superb Subway Diagram Detail series by SuperWarmRed showcases six details from the 2012 Massimo Vignelli New York Subway map, printed with 10 PANTONE spot colours. Set of 6 for $300 from the SuperWarmRed website.
David Edmondson’s superbly researched map of rail (and ferry) in and around 1937 San Francisco. 24″ x 24″ prints from $40 on David’s website. Check out his expanding range of other “Age of Rail” prints while you’re there!
CANADA ONLY! A fantastic replica of the 1958 Toronto Subway Map, available as a 20″ x 28″ print for just $20 from the TTC’s shop.
CANADA ONLY! It seems to me that it’s a rite of passage for Torontonians to steal subway maps from trains. I’ve got a better idea: buy the actual, official map from the TTC for just $10 (link no longer active, sorry!) and tell your friends that you nicked it.
About the only thing as good as actual transit maps is books about transit maps (and/or wayfinding design)! Here’s a selection of great reads for the map lover in your life!
Transit Maps of the World, November 2015 Edition by Mark Ovenden – a book that needs no further introduction to readers of this blog (My review here). A fantastic update to an already superb book. Buy on Amazon here.
London Underground by Design by Mark Ovenden – A complete look at the history of design in the Underground, the Tube Map included. The pioneering work of Frank Pick and Charles Holden is especially of interest, and there are plenty of beautiful Underground posters to savour. Buy on Amazon here.
One last Mark Ovenden book! Paris Underground explores the maps, stations and design of the famous Paris Métro over time. Buy on Amazon here.
The NYCTA Graphics Standards Manual reissue, compact edition. The Hamish Smyth/Jesse Reed facsimile of the famous Unimark manual, now in a more affordable compact 10″ x 10″ edition. $54.95 from standardsmanual.com.
Helvetica and the New York City Subway System by Paul Shaw. A comprehensive look at the introduction of the signage from that Graphics Standards Manual into the actual subway system. $42.95 from The MIT Press.
Underground Maps Unravelled by Maxwell Roberts. Not a cheap book by any means, but almost essential if you want to make better transit maps. Roberts has the uncanny ability to explore every option possible for a map right through to the end, even bad solutions that normal designers would discard much earlier in the process… all to see what makes a map tick. From £40 (UK) to £50 (the rest of the world), direct from Max’s website.
Vignelli Transit Maps by Peter Lloyd. An excellent exploration of the Massimo Vignelli New York Subway diagram and its historical context (My review here). From $35 on Amazon.
Submitted by Mike Syyap, who says:
The TTC recently had a board meeting, and they revealed what the the future map from 2021 would look like. They still haven’t decided on the what the name will be for an existing station (Eglinton West) which will be a big interchange. Between the the road name choice (Allen) and the neighbourhood choice (Cedarvale), I prefer the road name since a big majority of the name are already named after streets, and I’d like to say that most people in Toronto don’t exactly have an affiliation for neighbourhood names (unless they’re downtown). Map-wise, I’m conflicted at the portrayal of Line 5 as it is an LRT, half underground and half street-level. I know typical line design use different weighting or styles, but I suppose they’re doing this for consistency. What are your thoughts?
Transit Maps says:
I feel that the TTC is trying to present the system as a unified whole, despite any mode difference (LRT versus subway versus “RT” on the Scarborough Line). Hence the numbering scheme to tie all the lines together and the visual presentation of all lines being “equal”. Much the same is done in Los Angeles, where heavy rail subway and LRT are presented equally on the map under the “Metro Rail” brand. Perhaps “rapid transit” might be a better descriptor for the map, but “Subway” has historical precedence in Toronto, so it stays. Heck, the New York Subway isn’t entirely underground, nor is the London Underground, so I think we can cut the TTC a little slack here.
The map itself, though, is starting to run into problems. It’s always been heavily vertically compressed so that it can fit above the doors inside train cars, but the extension of the 1 – Yonge – University line out to Vaughan is really pushing it in terms of fitting things into the map. There’s an enormous gap between stations on the new horizontal part, and then five stations are crammed in at the end of the line. The diagonal part of the line through York University is at a very shallow angle as well, which makes things look even more cramped for room.
Some little inconsistencies in design as well: the restroom icon for Kennedy is between the label and the line numbers, but it’s underneath the name at Don Mills and other terminus stations. An indication in the legend for this icon would also be welcome.
I see that there’s no indication on the map of where you can transfer to GO Transit commuter rail. Torontonians, is that a problem or does no-one actually do that in real life? I personally like maps which encourage cross-agency multi-modal travel, but wonder if local usage of the system makes this a non-issue.
Our rating: The map seems to be an early prototype produced for the report it’s contained in, so I’ll cut it some slack, but it is revealing some severe limitations in the map’s current format. Two-and-a-half stars.
Submitted by Michael, who says:
Today, I would like to submit a different sort of map. Most time scale maps that I have seen so far (such as this one or this one) involve two common elements: a central station or origin, and concentric circles representing time. Though I believe that both of these are very good maps, this approach might be better suited to a city like Pittsburgh (where nearly everyone commutes to the central business district) rather than one such as the Bay Area (where there are many different destinations). I realized that it is possible to create a time scale map without a central origin or concentric circles. This map shows the result of my experiment, is based on the timetable of the Bay Area Rapid Transit system, and shows the approximate travel times between all stations on the system.
Transit Maps says:
An interesting approach from Michael, and one that works well in this instance because of BART’s usage of 60-degree/hexagonal angles in its own official map. That hex map background definitely puts me in mind of the strategic war games I used to play when I was younger, though!
Michael’s system is certainly ingenious (one hex = one minute), and probably works pretty well even when transferring across lines because BART does make some use of timed transfers. Maybe you’d add five minutes instead of one when moving from one line to another just to be a little more realistic?
However, the biggest drawback for me is the sheer number of hexes from one end of a line to another: I count 90 total hexes on the Millbrae-Pittsburg line (i.e., 89 minutes from one end to the other) – that’s a lot of tedious manual counting and quite prone to error. This could perhaps be mitigated by stating the total time required for each line in the legend, or maybe by having subtotals indicated for common sections of track on the map. Daly City – Embarcadero: 18 minutes, for example – allowing quicker addition of larger sets of numbers, rather than having to manually add up each and every hex between here and there.
In a way, this map is simply a graphical representation of those old road map matrices; in which all the possible points of origin would be listed down the page, with all the destinations listed across. A reader would then cross-reference the two locations they required to determine the time and/or distance between them. This map is definitely much prettier to look at than that, but a matrix is actually a far more efficient way of displaying this type of data.
Our rating: An interesting approach to the problem, executed very stylishly. However, counting large numbers of hexes gets tedious very quickly and ultimately the map fails to impart its information quickly enough for longer trips. Two-and-a-half stars, but huge kudos for trying a different approach!
