Archive for category Cartography Profession
Usability
Posted by Gretchen in Cartography Profession, Inspiration on October 21, 2010
Did you know that there have been studies on the usability of ATMs? In one case, an ATM design company figured out that most customers simply wanted to withdraw cash from the machines. From this the company decided to make it super-easy for a customer to perform this one major function. The other functions were still there, but the entire design was built around making it easy to withdraw cash.
The major finding of another study* was that there is a high correlation between ATM interface aesthetics and how easy people felt it was to use the system.
Lesson: aesthetics are important because they relate to perceptions on ease of use. Design the major function first and fill in details around that so the major function is always the first and foremost thing a user interprets. The application to maps? Pretty obvious?
If this topic interests you head on over to Users Fix Parking Ticket Machine Interface Themselves.
*Kurosu, M. and Kashimura, K. Determinants of the Apparent Usability, Proceedings of IEEE SMC, (1995), 1509- 1513.
Also confirmed by Noam Tractinsky in Aesthetics and Apparent Usability: Empirically Assessing Cultural and Methodological Issues.
How Much Critique Is Normal?
Posted by Gretchen in Cartography Profession on October 8, 2010
I gave a talk at Colorado State University yesterday titled “Maps That Show Off: Communicating Our Work Through Cartography.” Part of my talk focused on the importance of incorporating critique into your map design process.
During the question/answer session Amy asked me how typical it is to get critique from my clients. I told her that it is fairly common – especially to get critiqued on things like color, which everyone seems to have an opinion on. I’d like to elaborate on this just a little bit.
First off, every client is different. I’ve had some clients who give me free reign and rarely have comments over things like color or other design aspects – though they might want an underlying data layer changed, they won’t get involved with the design. These people may figure that they’ve hired a professional to do this, so why spend their valuable time changing things?
Other people like to have more involvement. For those people it might be nice to offer several solutions at the end to choose from. Usually, though, my solution is to involve these people with design decisions from the beginning. For example, if I am having some trouble putting all the elements onto one map while maintaining readability, I might mention that this is something I’m working on. This allows them to be a part of the overall process, see where the end product came from, etc.
I am fortunate to have some very long term clients. With long-terms clients there might be a project where they want more involvement in the look/feel of a map while on other projects they simply delegate the whole thing to me. It really depends on their outcome expectations and time availability.
In general, I very much encourage feedback from anyone I’ve designed a map for (and from clients for whom I’m doing analysis – which is, after all, the main focus of my firm).
Innovations Versus Standards
Posted by Gretchen in Cartography Profession on September 6, 2010
There is a dichotomy in the cartography profession. On the one hand it is a discipline with standards for all sorts of things ranging from the use of color to typography to what gets included on a map. On the other hand cartography is also an art and as such must embody the enthusiasm of artistic work in bucking convention and dealing with the particularities at hand by innovative means.
Sometimes we have cartographers who are firmly stuck in the slow and dismal state of “standards only” output and sometimes we have those who are revolving in their own alien world of mapping for aesthetic purpose and not for any utilitarian purpose. Most of us (sigh of relief) would put ourselves somewhere between the two extremes.
I wonder if, as we progress through our respective careers, which extreme we will tend to drift toward? Or maybe stay somewhere right in the middle? I’m a little bit toward the aesthetic side of things but not too much.
I still am fairly certain my next map will include some kind of blue hue for the water, it probably won’t have more than two typefaces, I’ll italicize stream names, I’ll use brown for contours. But I am also quite convinced that my next map will not have a logo on it anywhere, will utilize fashionable colors within those restraints mentioned, and will have the most simplistic, non-jargon, descriptive title possible.
How about you?
Recent Comments