7. Problems of Realizing Ideals with Computer Systems
Mapping software provides cartographers with the same sorts of advantages
that text-processing software offers writers. Computers assist cartographers
with the accurate drafting that has traditionally required tremendous manual
skill, patience, and training. They also make it far easier to revise maps,
to experiment with layout, composition, and symbolization, and to duplicate
information from one map to another when producing series of maps. Still,
the effective use of automated systems requires that the cartographer be
just as familiar with the strengths and limitations of each automated system
as with principles of effective cartography. The point is that computers
can be used to produce poor maps as readily as good maps and the responsibility
to know the difference rests with the cartographer. Perhaps the thought
to keep in mind is that computers don't make good or bad maps, cartographers
do.
In turning to the use of computer systems, one should consider
a number of related issues:
7.1 Systems vary greatly in their strengths and
weaknesses: Be aware of both
Most software systems are customized to meet the demands of specific
mapping tasks. They are intended to do one or two things very well--perhaps
demographic or contour mapping--and are not so good when deployed outside
their domain. By acquainting yourself with a system's raison d'être
you will also be able to surmise potential limitations. More importantly,
do not assume that all your mapping needs will be subsumed by a single
software system. It is common practice to use a variety of systems to produce
even individual maps. Some computer-assisted drafting packages make it
very easy to create precise base maps, but these base maps will be transfered
to other graphics or drawing programs to add shading or lettering. Contour
mapping and terrain modeling software may offer very advanced features
for surface modeling, but limited capabilities for text, annotations, and
shading; these can be added with other systems. These days it is relatively
easily to move digital maps and graphics from one software system to other
so as to capture the virtues of each and avoid their deficiencies.
7.2 Consider availability of needed functions and
ease of use
In selecting software it is often easy to distracted by "bells-and-whistles"
-- features that promise the potential of extra "pizzazz"-- such as hundreds
of fonts or millions of colors. These extra capabilities can be nice to
have, but it is essential to keep one's eye on a couple of critical issues.
First, how well will the system perform the functions that you use most
often, perhaps on a daily basis? Extra features can be useful, but they
are of little concern if you only intend to use them once a year. Second,
how easy will it be learn the system well enough to incorporate it in your
work? This is more than asking whether the system comes with tutorials
and instructional materials. Such materials are of course important, but
for every extra feature a system offers, time is added to the learning
process. Even the rudimentary drawing packages provided free on many computer
systems can produce exceptional maps, and they are very easy to learn.
Some advanced systems for computer-assisted drafting and geographic information
systems can produce maps of equal or better quality, but require weeks
or months to master. Do not feel you need to acquire more "power" than
you need right now. Software changes so rapidly that you may be investing
in capabilities that will be surpassed before you need them.
7.3 Be aware of the problems of designing for particular
output devices
Be aware that the destination in map production is particular a output
device: a screen, or pen, inkjet, thermal, and electrostatic plotters.
These devices vary greatly in their ability to depict linework, symbols,
colors, and so forth. Cartographers have had to wait decades for the quality
of low-cost, easy-to-use output devices to catch up with the capabilities
of computers and mapping software. But such equipment is now available
offering excellent resolution and color in A and B formats for less than
$500. Still, what you see on the screen may not be exactly what the printer
produces--colors, patterns, and lineweights may vary. You must design your
map to the characteristics of the final output device. It is no use claiming
that "it looked good on the screen." It is the final map that matters and
experimentation with settings is a key to understanding how output devices
vary in their representation of your map.
7.4 Experimentation and multiple iterations are
often required
Computer systems are able to assume some of the more onerous drafting
tasks associated with map production, but that does not mean that you will
produce an effective map the first time around. In working with automated
systems, patience is a virtue. Time must be set aside to learn the system
and its options. Once a person is familiar with the capabilities of system,
map production will speed up, but not necessarily immediately. One has
to experiment with settings through multiple iterations of a map. Patient,
systematic experimentation with options is vital.
7.5 Never trust defaults
The single most important rule in using automated systems is: Never
trust defaults. Without your careful guidance, most systems use "default"
settings designed, perhaps, to fit the needs of an "average" user or simply
to get you started. These settings should always be questioned from the
standpoint of your cartographic goals. Unquestioned, these settings may
lead to ineffective or even misleading maps. Many of these settings are,
initially, very useful because they will help users find their way around
the software system. For example, some systems provide automatic options
for titling, legends, shading, and symbology. In some cases, these setting
may work for your project. It is more likely that you will need to change
them. Learn the options available on your system, and do not feel obliged
to use the standard settings simply because they are more convenient. Again,
remember, computers don't make good or bad maps, cartographers do.
default
map___same
map, better format
Additional discusion of many of these points is included in an article
by Kenneth E. Foote, 1992. Mapping the past: A survey of microcomputer
cartography. Historical Methods 25: 121-131.
Go
on to Into the Future
Return
to Contents
