Get Ahead, Get a Map - TFL Interview
Rupert: Last week, we asked what makes good design? Has Harry Beck's design classic from 1933 been lost in a tangle of new lines and detailed information? We can now bring you a response from Transport for London's Group Design Manager.
TfL will publish its new tube map this Sunday - November 11th. But thanks to Diamond Geezer and others, we've got wind of it early and it's attracting plenty of comment. It's a journey that's taken us from this:
To this:
See it better here.
But does this latest map do an injustice to Harry Beck's original? Here are a couple of alternatives that have been brough to our attention. First this from Max Roberts:
Here's another Max made earlier:
And this from Alex Gollner:
Any of the above appeal? There's much on going debate about all this on the Going Underground blog. Here, as promised, is TfL's Group Design Manager Innes Ferguson. Eddie first asked if any other designs had been considered?
If you click on the Channel Guide, you can also hear from Oliver Green from the London Transport Museum. The LT Museum re-opens on November 22nd.
Email us
Our Twitter
Join our Facebook group
Listen to iPM
Technorati
Google
Ice Rocket
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~35~RS~)
Comments
There are a lot of details on the modern map that were not included on the original. For example overland railway interchanges, and the travel zones. But the main difference is the inclusion of a couple of overland railway lines (North London line plus one not previously included starting at Clapham Junction), and the Docklands railways.
The new TfL map is still much simpler than a true realisation of these lines, so in that sense the great step forward of Beck's map is still there.
Many years ago in Tokyo I purchased a small book describing the Tokyo Underground and surface trains ( I used it for exploring). Not only was there a Beck style map of the whole system, but each line was described with landmarks, museums etc available from each stop - and those lines (some of which were overground trains) were also shown Beck style. I did not give the fact that it was Beck style a second thought at the time.
Hi
Interesting issue - there's a whole clump of maps here if it helps your discussion
http://www.johnsonbanks.co.uk/thoughtfortheweek/index.php?thoughtid=228
Yours
Michael Johnson
I wonder why the London Overground orange is not the same as the East London Line orange. Once the latter line closes I do think the map should look quite a bit better again.
One of my main issues with this map is the wheelchair symbols overcomplicating things, especially in cases when certain lines are wheelchair accessible at a station, but others aren't. I understand why they have been introduced, but I think a small symbol next to the station name (as New York uses) would have been nicer.
Or just issue a separate map for wheelchair users, just like there are maps for bike users.
The District line still seems needlessly complicated, as does the Northern one. I think these should be split in the same way the H&S and Circle have been split on the map.
The map is still much more clear than say, Paris or Tokyo, though.
Totally correct about disabled logos. There is no need to put in the map, they can go by the name or below.
I've been waiting for this new map for a few months now. It's clear that this map is no longer 'a design classic.' I've come up with a design that I think is clearer and looks a lot better. For more, please visit http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2007/11/02/a-classic-that-has-lost-its-way/
I hope you'll mention the way in which TfL tries to claim copyright on its designs. I think it's pretty disgraceful the way it attempts to slap lawsuits and threats of 'copyright infringement on people who use the design.
In some cases, people who produced parody versions (including one hilarious version that had anagrams of each station) received threatening solicitors' letters.
With something as public as the tube maps, I don't think they should try to copyright it.
The first of the Max Roberts maps shown - the all-curves one - is beautiful in its own right. I don't live anywhere near London, but I'm still tempted to print it out and put it on my wall, as an example of wonderful design; the extra space (over the standard map) makes it so much easier and clearer to read.
Thanks for the link. The version of the map you linked to on my site is one that emphsises the termini of each line. My proposed map is the one at http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2007/11/02/a-classic-that-has-lost-its-way/
Alex - thx. Sorted now.
I like Max' first map also. It reminds me that expediency is important too: if you want an organisation to take on a new design, it is important to understand the politics involved.
In this case too much of Transport for London's corporate branding is tied into the map. They would only accept designs that look very similar to the current design. The trick is to follow the map rules that have been around for the last 40 years, maybe evolve them a little and make the best design you can. From information design and aesthetic points of view.
The only way the 'smile' map would be accepted would be if there was a single person who decides to take a chance to approving what the public of the future will like - as opposed to what the people of today are used to. In the 1930s TfL had Frank Pick. Today the closest public figure to his vision would be Apple's Steve Jobs.
Where is TfL's Steve Jobs? Can public institutions justify having such people running the show?
"...Last week, we asked what makes good design?.."
* Classic Simplicity
* Less-is-more
P.S. I will try to learn from the latter...
The curvy Max Roberts for me - the new TFL is far too cluttered; indicative of Ken's mind.
I'll print off Max's for future use.
With my professional hat on, all maps like this have the problem in those individuals who have colour vision problems. Blacks, browns and reds can all look the same to some folk.
I appreciate there is not really a way round that.
I luuurrrve the curly Max Roberts map...but then i have just been for a collagues long leaving do lunch (liquid).....
The Underground map is fixable, and I think that Alex does a good job of working within the rules. I would like to see it tried with an extra few cm in each direction.
I still can't believe that TfL are serious about the Barking-Gospel Oak line. Its full of Kinks AND geographically wrong, perhaps a secret warning to people not to use it.
The amount of information pollution on the current official map does not help. We have 102 wheelchairs, 23 station warning daggers, 7 boats, 16 interchanges with direct National Rail services to airports (but which airport, how do I find how to get to Stansted using this map?) and 13 of the 48 National rail interchanges qualified with very small print. We have some great big warning boxes, and yet more small red print (red is the hardest colour to read).
What is the message this map communicates? "The Underground is simple and convenient?" No, the message is, "Don't go near the Underground unless you can solve the hardest Soduko with your eyes shut."
hey - Stewart M (13)
of course there are some ways...
what about the back of the London A-Z book which is printed in monotone and uses differently broken/ hatched lines?
Granted, it could add to 'clutter' if done badly, but if done well...?
just a thought
I don’t see any need to radically alter the existing design, but to reinvent does represent a challenge to be relished.
the curvy map made me WANT to read it without needing to go anywhere!
Then theres' the integrated transport map, all London Travel Planner that links real places to real places with buses, tubes and trains.
Well at least you guys in London do have a great tradition of subway maps based on diagrams. Here in New York the regular MTA map is dire; full of inaccuracies and hopeless to carry on the subway.
We just attended a talk this very afternoon by one of your fellow Brits, Mark Ovenden, who was here in the city promoting his new book "Transit maps of the world" (which I believe some of you europeans have seen previously under a different name).
The debate about our New York map is whether or not it should be returned to some form of a diagram (also see this weeks Time Out New York) and following reading this blog, seeing the great ideas from Max Roberts and others plus reading about Harry Beck, not to mention this afternoon's impressive presentation, and plenty of recent controvessy in the press, I'd say the ball is finally in play for the New York map to change too!
There are two thing that are wrong about the new TFL map.
Thes are:
1) The grey zones. The grey is not needed and this is shown in the alternative version.
2) The indication of step-free-access stations. This is very badly executed from a design point of view. The way this has been done is really ugly and breaks the interchange symbol.
Interesting discussion. As someone who has written about the design of urban rail maps from all over the world, have to agree with Paul Bakalite above, and others here on both points.
The heritage of this diagram is world class and has influenced designers of virtually every transit map. However the current version seems to be suffering from some kind of design-by- committee-disease.
* The zones are far too heavy - they could easily be toned down without losing any of their relevance or legibility.
* The step-free access symbol is a sop to political correctness gone bonkers. Anyone who's ever tried to use this knows that the quality of the "step-free" access varies wildly even within those stations that have been obliterated with the wheelchair symbol - a much more sensible solution has been proposed by Max Roberts and others to include this information on a back panel (or even a seperate map) It's unlikely a person with restricted mobility would turn up by chance at a tube station without first checking online or by phone if they can complete their journey in which case much more detailed information could be supplied than is offered by this worst of all solutions) - no other map in the world has allowed its basic design to be so badly wrecked by such an over-bearing, unnecessary and misleading pile of PC madness.
* The original interchange symbols and simple ticks for non-interchange stations needs to be returned as soon as possible. As suggested above the wheelchair symbol could stay as it was alongside the station name. It looks even worse on the in-car strip line maps inside the trains! Everyone in LU knows this but they are too scared to stand up to an overly powerful internal department. Very silly and very sad as once again something that Britain used to excel at has been spoiled by daftness.
There are also a large numvber of maps that pre-date Beck on our flickr site which are worth checking out:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ltmuseum/