Despite Being a Relatively Simple System as Well

Rased

Nevertheless remains quite abstract, which allows it to work in extra information like the placement of bus lines and commuter rails. San Francisco sfbart_scale Melbourne melbourne San Francisco’s and Melbourne’s maps are the simplest of the bunch. SF’s BART map is thus able to be fairly geographically accurate (although you can see discrepancies between the map and actual scale in how far the ends of the lines actually extend) and is able to include extra information like the presence of mountain ranges and bodies of water  geographic landmarks that are very familiar to Bay Area residents.

White backgrounds, primary colored lines that meet at regular angles image manipulation service Check out how the unique subway maps for Stuttgart, Montreal and Lisbon differ. Stuttgart stuttgart Montreal montreal_scale Lisbon lisbon Evolution Style Looking at the above maps, it’s clear a certain style is prevalent: birds’ eye view from directly above,  of a subway map It’s particularly interesting to see how a single subway system addresses these issues of how to represent complexity, geography and scale as it grows and evolves over time For a little Cold War throwback, we’ll look at 2 of the world’s most unusual and complex subway systems.


Moscow’s and New York City’s, and how their maps evolved from the 1940s through the present. Moscow moscow evolution Here, we see a more archaic form of cartography (1947), which contains landmark emblems in order to help guide the viewer, evolve to adapt the prevailing language of subway map design, including primary color lines and no pictorial information (1967). This map becomes more and more abstract, reaching its peak in 1979 with an image that consists of a perfect circle intersected by 6 perfectly straight lines, bearing little relation to the real geography of the area In 1990.