Architect Has Painstakingly Standardized the World's Subway Maps (2014) | Hacker News Reader

Architect Has Painstakingly Standardized the World's Subway Maps (2014)

citylab.com

101 pointsBerislavLopac67 comments

I always love a new map, and I can only judge New York City, but for that city, this isn't an improvement.

It'd be fine in Manhattan, but it makes it look like the Queens and Brooklyn lines are super close, even walkable, when in fact they're miles apart.

Someone may look at this map and (correctly) think that walking from the 4 to the N in Manhattan is easy, so you can also walk from the J in Brooklyn to the R in Queens, which would be, I don't know, at least an hour's walk.

I think it's prioritizing aesthetic beauty over function.

All symbolic metro maps work ignore physical locations in order to make labels and lines readable and clearly visible.

Most transit maps will generally try to preserve direction, though, in that A east of B will not all of a sudden wind up northeast or north of B. There are exceptions but the amount of directional liberties is fairly small on a standard map.

A significant portion of the NYC map is not only spatially but directionally disoriented, which is just confusing. Especially since New Yorkers have a good grasp of the relative directions of things due to the fact that the grid is so prevalent.

The London map has both of these problems as well, it is both spatially and directionally disoriented, and not an improvement over the existing tube map.

Personally, the Toronto map bothers me far more than the NYC map, because here the Toronto street grid is depicted as a NE/SW alignment instead of N/S... and Toronto is closer to a true N/S alignment than Manhattan, which gets a N/S alignment on the map.

Check this out: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21817906

I think it's prioritizing aesthetic beauty over function.

This style of map is not intended to be used as a walking guide or you would be correct.

They are for determining the simplest way of getting from station A to station B once you are on the train.

I think you are aware of that so representing the other "walking" world within this one is essentially breaking an axiom of that intent, like asking for a 2D map that represents 3 dimensions.

Maybe he is aware of the existing maps ... and as he states “this isn’t an improvement”. Since the current NYC maps serves both purposes astonishingly well.

But our goal isn't to get to a different station- it's to get from our origin to our destination. Previous studies of how people try to navigate have shown that people make heavy use of landmarks like parks which is why the MTAs map shows parks and major streets. Passengers also take into account how the train feels to be moving which this map doesn't convey. If the train obviously feels to turn left but the map doesn't show it, passengers get anxious.

His current map version: https://www.inat.fr/metro/new-york/

There are other problems with this map that demonstrate to me at least that the designer simply hasn't put as much thought into the design as the MTA. Some examples:

- Suppose I am on the Lexington Ave line and I want to know if my train (a 4 train) will stop at Astor place. I see a dot but no labels. So I start searching down the map for what the dot means. Eventually two green lines becomes one green line. What does that mean? I give up and start scanning upward and see that one line is for the 4/5 and the other line is for the 6. I finally have my answer. The MTAs map just tells me what trains stop at Astor place.

- This map implies that there are free transfers to the Path train when in fact there is not.

- This map implies that I can transfer between the 8th and 7th ave lines at Penn Station when in fact I can not.

- Is my Q train going to stop at 49th st in Manhattan? No one knows. That's just a minor design problem that was caused by a lack of space. The lack of space was caused by the designer's decision to illustrate lines individually.

The map doesn't seem to show the free out-of-system transfers between Inwood 207th St and the nearby 1 stops, either.

Edit: Although oddly it does show the one between Lexington Ave/63rd St and Lexington Ave/59th St. Huh. I figured the designer just missed the existence of out-of-system transfers, but no, they just missed that particular set of them.

I once had a routine subway commute in NYC that involved an out-of-system transfer walking between two nearby stations. Walking proximity is relevant info.

Brooklyn near the Barclay’s center by chance?

I always wondered how that works, you just swipe again and it doesn’t deduct if you got on a certain subset of the lines and then swipe at certain stops within some time period?

This transfer was elsewhere in downtown Brooklyn, closer to Brooklyn Heights, but yeah that's another likely place.

Most such transfers would be billed as two fares if paying per ride, since only a few specific subway to subway transfers are officially free, but most people who routinely commute by subway have a monthly pass and don't need to care about that.

(The monthly price is wisely set just slightly above the fares one would incur in a typical routine commute over a month, meaning anyone who makes a small handful of personal subway rides each month on top of a routine commute is financially better off buying the monthly pass.)

> A 2D map that represents 3 dimensions

You mean like a topographical map?

:) Yeah, that thought occurred to me as I was posting my comment, but the point remains that a functional principle is being broken by the request.

Incidentally there are "walking maps", so it can be done - but it subverts the original intent and frankly I find them pretty unusable.

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/walking-tube-map.pdf

But at this point, if you are looking for a multi-dimensional requirement maybe its best to use something more convenient, like CityMapper or similar apps.

https://citymapper.com

These maps are designed for subway use only, not for walking. It would be wrong to infer anything other than which stops follow each other sequentially and which stops link to other lines. If you see someone walking on the street, using a subway map for directions, please be kind and help them.

It's better to read this more similarly to an electrical diagram rather than a cartographic representation of the city.

Yeah. It's only marginally better than Massimo Vignelli's terrible subway map.

Designers seem to love making subway maps that are aesthetically pleasing but impractical for the end user.

Or maybe, due to different requirements, it's just not possible to design one map that works for everyone.

I think it's crappy that all the other responses you've received so far are ignoring that you are comparing the existing NYC subway map to a map that claims to be better.

the NYC subway map is better, so perhaps whatever design principles it uses would work better in Paris also. And if not, that might teach us all something about map-making, unlike the other replies to your comment which teach nothing because they can't seem to learn anything.

peace out.

Oh it seems we're not looking at the same map; the one in the article seems to be an old version. How about this one? https://www.inat.fr/metro/new-york/

That looks much better since it distorts relative geography less terribly (stops are in the same relative geographic orientation to each other as they are in real life, more or less.)

The major issue I have with this version is the strange inclusion of the LIRR when no other commuter railroad is included in its entirety. And the main issue there is that it's relegated to a tiny corner of the northeast map, when in reality those are trains that take 4 hours and take you 110 miles out of the city. In fact, why bother showing that on a map of frequent, rapid transit, when the trains to Montauk, for example, run a handful of times a day?

My understanding is New York’s metro map is an anomaly due to there historically being 3 unconnected and competing subways. Thus sometimes to get places you had to transfer and the relative locations and distances between stops was relevant.

Normal subway maps, in my experience from living in 2 cities with a subway (Toronto and Berlin), aren’t like this and derived from work by a guy named Harry Beck [1].

[1] https://youtu.be/iBErp8qvWZg

> It'd be fine in Manhattan, but it makes it look like the Queens and Brooklyn lines are super close, even walkable, when in fact they're miles apart.

The current MTA map is basically just as bad at this. If you look at the two maps side by side, they more or less equally exaggerate the distances between all of the lines/stations.

https://new.mta.info/sites/default/files/2019-10/subway_map_...

http://www.inat.fr/files/new-york-city-metro-subway-map.png

IMPORTANT EDIT: when I wrote the above comment, I assumed that the map shown in the article was the same map the architect currently has on their website. This turned out to be a dramatically wrong assumption. The image in the article is: https://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/legacy/2014/04/09/...

I find these maps difficult to use if I'm in a new city. I have to essentially guess which station corresponds to which real world location to plan my trip. Luckily, Google maps can account for that, so only station names become important. At that point, the subway map itself is pointless though.

That is why you need two maps: a geographical map with station locations marked to see which stations are close and the structural map of the routes to determine how to get to the target station you picked in step 1.

Alternatively, just use (Google Maps/Apple Maps/City Mapper/Transit/et al.)'s routing.

Their routing will generally be better than what most locals could come up with. Although I have noticed that Google Maps tends to assume that transferring between lines has an effectively-zero wait time which is far from the truth in most cases.

But why would I need a map like the one in the article in the first place then? All I have to do is locate the station I want to get to and consult the list of lines leading to the station.

I really dislike the style of these maps, the lettering is so sparse and modern that it's hard to read compare his map http://www.inat.fr/metro/boston/ to https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/maps/2019-04-08-rap... is the latter a cluttered mess? Oh heck yea, but it sure is legible - the map he produced is unreadable at the zoom level required to view the full thing on 2550x1440... and legibility is like the whole point.

These would be printed, and large. I don't think legibility is a major issue with either map.

I much prefer the “new” map. I’ve never been to Boston. I know nothing about it’s layout.

When I give myself to go from, say, Wonderland to Braintree, the new one performs better for a few reasons:

- the names of the important nodes are more prominent

- the lines are less prominent, there’s no need for them to be so overbearing

- the multi-coloured train stations give me a reduced hint as to which lines stop there

- for some reason, and I can’t put my finger on it, I find that I can more easily create a mental model of the city. While the actual map makes me feel like a mouse im a labyrinth, scurrying around, never knowing the overall picture.

Ref thinner lines in particular though, one of the trade offs is that information has been removed. For example, which Green Line trains make stops where. Also the connection between Park and Downtown Crossing is no longer labeled leaving us to wonder what it is. There are other examples as well.

I think the zoom level could be fixed by chopping off some of the newer map. The MBTA map you linked has way less of each regional rail line.

My bigger complaint with the newer map is I'd rather a map do better at showing geographic landmarks, like rivers as they make it easier for me to locate where the station is in the larger city. For example: https://geoawesomeness.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Geoawe...

I can only speak to my local system, but the NYC subway map there is a travesty. Everything outside Manhattan is more wildly inaccurate than even the Vignelli maps of the 60s and 70s. I would expect tourists to get much more lost with this map than with the current standard.

this version from his site is somewhat better, at least it recognizes that there's water south and east of Brooklyn: https://www.inat.fr/metro/new-york/

It's a bit weird that the map also includes a few lines that aren't subway lines. For example, on the DC map there are a few bus lines listed as well as the light inter-city commuter trains. Its also not clear at a glance which is which when looking at the map. While the extra info is nice to have, people are going to be looking around for subway lines that don't exist.

The maps really need a legend. The font is also way too small. If this were posted in place of the regular metro map in the subway, I'd have to stand up and walk over to it to read it. Older people would be pulling out their magnifiers.

The Chicago map not only includes the CTA (the "subway"), but commuter rail lines in the city as well (Metra). This is actually a very useful feature, especially for people using these lines coming in to the city as there are multiple places you can make a direct transfer to the CTA.

Perhaps there are maps targeted to tourists or suburbanites that show it, but none I've ever seen as clearly as this: http://www.inat.fr/metro/chicago/

It's pretty but it would be more useful if it included bus lines, which gets more ridership than the L and Metra combined.

True, but then it starts to get more complicated as well. The full system CTA maps found at a lot of station and some bus stops are actually very nice, in my opinion. If I recall correctly I've even seen some that show a circular area around the map's location that represents one mile to give you an idea of what's in walking distance around the station.

For actual physical maps, check out https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21817906

Aww, no Delhi? We got hella urban rail. Although I guess a large proportion has opened after 2014.

Here: http://www.inat.fr/metro/delhi/

Some changes are quite bold.

In Berlin the station "Hansaplatz" changed sides of the other train track.

inat: https://i.imgur.com/rRAO7TG.png

google maps: https://i.imgur.com/xF5K56x.png

(get's rid of the kink in the orange line though: https://i.imgur.com/PNUbe80.png )

I personally just miss the river as a main landmark.

Cam Booth does a lot of similar work. I have one of his DC Metro prints framed in my home office: https://www.cambooth.net/project-washington-dc-metro-map/

Here is the final product, http://cambooth.net/store/product/washington-dc-metrorail/

Does the subway map graphing technique of placing overlapping lines adjacent to each other have a name?

A while back I was graphing multiple time-series with discrete times and values, but I got frustrated by how illegible the overlapping sections were. I tried to find a subway-map-style algorithm to solve the issue, but didn’t really know what to search for.

I imagine the algorithm itself is relatively complex. Minimizing the number of crossovers is almost certainly NP hard.

One big problem with public transportation is that most systems are not very accessible to newcomers so people often revert back to car because it’s easier (at least i do). It would be nice to have an app that for systems worldwide can tell you how to get from point A to point B at a certain time, how to buy tickets, where stations are and so on. So far google maps is the best from what I have seen but it still isn’t prefect.

You mean something like Citymapper? https://citymapper.com

Citymapper is really close to that at least in Europe.

Much more than Europe: https://citymapper.com/cities

I tried some really simple things for Stockholm, that I know well. The public transport options are way off. 95 minutes instead of 30 or so.

For Stockholm you want "Res i Sthlm" or SL.se's own app/web site.

They use SL's (Stockholm's Public Transport) own APIs and data, so it's always up-to-date, even with minute disruptions on the lines.

Agreed. I should have said it.

I like rome2rio.com for help with interconnected public transport systems

https://transit.app/

I love the way subway maps look. I would really like to download the higher resolution images, but they appear to be 404.

You can find them on the actual site: http://www.inat.fr/maps/

Thanks. These images are very large which is great. The Paris one was 5000x5000 pixels.

they look beautiful but does anyone actually use these maps? seems like something an app can do pretty easily.

If they are posted at the metro station and within carriages, I sure as hell would. I don't want to use my phone for _everything_, especially if what I want to see can be mass produced on a piece of paper.

But you'd have to guess which station is where, because the map isn't necessarily representative of it.

Someone has to write that application though. Just think about the amount of work that's gone into GraphViz, and this seems a harder task still, with probably-complex aesthetic constraints.

Yes, I actually saved Jug Cerović's Tokyo map on my phone back in Nov 2014. I found it superior to other offerings at the time because it had multiple systems on one map without making my eyes glaze over.

Cerović: http://www.inat.fr/metro/tokyo/

vs Tokyo Metro: https://www.tokyometro.jp/library_in/en/subwaymap/pdf/rosen_...

vs Tokyo Subway: https://www.kotsu.metro.tokyo.jp/subway/line.pdf

When visiting a foreign city, I'll save a copy of the city's transit map on my phone. It saves me the hassle of squeezing by people to check out the map by the train door, and it's not susceptible to spotty data while underground.

btw, Cerović's maps are now offered in an official app. Unfortunately there's no interactivity.

- https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/inat-metro-maps/id1194423205

- https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.amilutinov...

I have a funny piece of trivia for you. The name of the project struck me as a little weird. And given how labour intensive this would be it is kind of fitting tho. Oh - inat means spite/stubborn in Serbian.

Calling this just a metro/subway map seems incorrect at least in Helsinki's case. Its map seems to also contain all tram, commuter train and even a couple of main bus lines.

They have changes explained if you click into a map. I was wondering how Paris had such a perfect circle line, but it was changed to be prettier and more symbolic. Still neat!

no LA, but SF bay area is here: http://www.inat.fr/metro/san-francisco-bay-area/

Beijing is an old map as it lacks many new lines. Besides, that is what the map basically looked like to begin with... Not much improvement.

The article is from 2014, and the map is also from 2014. However you can find the Oct 2019 Beijing map here: http://www.inat.fr/metro/beijing/

But I agree that for Beijing, Inat doesn't offer much improvement aside from whitespace--which may not be desired when you're optimising for information density. However from personal experience, their combined version of the Tokyo systems was better than anything else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com