http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...-the-ultimate-
tube-map-redesign/

I like this a lot.
--
Roland Perry

On 2014\04\24 17:44, Roland Perry wrote:
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...-the-ultimate-
tube-map-redesign/

I like this a lot.

Mostly okay, but the West Ruislip / Watford area is a disaster. It's a
shame South Wimbledon hasn't been put next to Wimbledon, although the
standard tube map is as bad in that respect.

In message , at 18:06:59 on
Thu, 24 Apr 2014, Basil Jet remarked:
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...-the-ultimate-
tube-map-redesign/

I like this a lot.

Mostly okay, but the West Ruislip / Watford area is a disaster. It's a
shame South Wimbledon hasn't been put next to Wimbledon, although the
standard tube map is as bad in that respect.

There's rather a big gap between Camden Town and Camden Road, and
perhaps the Thameslink line should show be shown at least as far as West
Hampstead; but it's clearly not trying to embrace National Rail at all,
other than show where the airport routes are.
--
Roland Perry

I may be hopelessly literal but I find the use of nice straight vertical
lines pretty but misleading when it leads to Beckton appearing at the
same latitude as Colliers Wood and Woolwich Arsenal as West Croydon.

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:


http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...ultimate-tube-
map-redesign/

I like this a lot.

I don't. The gap between Wimbledon and Morden is absurd for starters.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Thursday, 24 April 2014 17:44:05 UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...-the-ultimate-

tube-map-redesign/



I like this a lot.

I also liked it a lot. There is a number after every single station; it turns out that this signifies the zone. It seems a long-winded way of doing it. I think these numbers should be left off.

The London Overground/North London Line seems most honoured by the change. It has been granted its own unique circle - although it is greyed out.

I'm also glad to see that the creator has done away with that poxy New Johnson ********.

Offramp wrote on 25 April 2014 17:04:19 ...
On Thursday, 24 April 2014 17:44:05 UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...-map-redesign/



I like this a lot.

I also liked it a lot. There is a number after every single station; it turns out that this signifies the zone. It seems a long-winded way of doing it. I think these numbers should be left off.

The London Overground/North London Line seems most honoured by the change. It has been granted its own unique circle - although it is greyed out.

I'm also glad to see that the creator has done away with that poxy New Johnson ********.

I'm not sure what you've got against New Johnston (note spelling), but
the font on this map is hopeless. It would help if we had a decent PDF
file (it says "click on maps to enlarge" but that gives me a smaller
image) but on the copies I've seen his font is badly spaced and
generally much less readable than New Johnston.

The accompanying blurb says that Jug Cerovic enlarged the central part
of the map to make it easier to read. Yes, well, Beck did that too.
Cerovic has enlarged the centre a bit more so that the suburbs are
hopelessly cramped and distorted. It is claimed that "stations are laid
out in a way that makes more sense geographically." Evidently the
author hasn't looked at St Paul's/Mansion House or Heathrow/Acton Town
or the other examples already mentioned here. As for Preston
Road/Harrow-on-the-Hill, that's just absurd.

I do NOT like it. What's the point of it?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/201...-the-ultimate-
tube-map-redesign/

I like this a lot.
--
Roland Perry

Like any "map" that is actually a diagram it's a compromise. Look at the
pre-Beck maps and you find an incredibly squashed central area and
beautifully accurate spacing out in the country. Beck recognised this as a
problem and came up with a solution; not necessarily "the" solution, just
"a" solution.

We've all become used to the Beck style map in London and we can adjust for
the geographical inaccuracies. Well, no, we can't all do that. I once
attended a meeting at the Lancaster Gate Hotel with a colleague who lived in
Reading. When we came out he headed for the tube and I asked him where he
was going. "Paddington" was his answer, looking at me like I was slightly
odd(!). I persuaded him to walk with me and he was genuinely surprised how
much quicker it was than using the tube via Notting Hill Gate. If he
couldn't work that out can we expect genuine tourists to do so?

My question is therefore is this better than the current post-Beck "map" we
all know today. Well, first we have to define "better" and that alone
would take a long time to agree so I'm going to wimp out and ignore that
issue.

What I can do is comment on some (but not all) of the differences.

The lines are thinner and the whole map seems to be less assertive than the
Beck model
I might even describe the overall image as "pastel"
The geographic distortion is similar to Beck with a large central zone at
the expense of the outer branches.
The key is placed so that the branches south of the Thames don't have a neat
line of termination points in the way that all the lines from Watford
Junction eastwards do.
In the event that the diagram was adopted by TfL the copyright notice would
be placed elsewhere in significantly smaller type I suspect (per current
TfL) and even "London" might be removed allowing the top left to be
reorganised.
The use of letters at the various terminating points feels good but I'm not
wholly convinced, then maybe I'm saying "that's not the Beck style".

Someone here has suggested a landscape format and I'd be interested to see
that version. I can't help feeling, however, looking at the other maps,
that he is trying to create a "house style" so that tourists from other
places using the same style can use his diagram confidently.

In conclusion if this was suddenly adopted by TfL there would be uproar.
If they ever did decide to convert they'd have to do it in stages. For me
the proof of the pudding would be in the usability - I'll be in New York in
the summer and I might try his out against the MTA map since I'm not
significantly familiar with that system.

In message , at 11:38:07 on
Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Graham Harrison
remarked:
The geographic distortion is similar to Beck with a large central zone
at the expense of the outer branches.

Although in the Central zone there are some significant improvements
over Beck regarding geographical mapping. For example Charing Cross (but
not Covent Garden) and Queensway, although it's a pity the "D" and "O"
of Edgware Road prevent Lancaster Gate and Marble Arch moving to the
left to be south of Edgware Road and Paddington.

The key is placed so that the branches south of the Thames don't have a
neat line of termination points in the way that all the lines from
Watford Junction eastwards do.

Yes, that should be in the upper left instead of the title, I think.
--
Roland Perry