Customer Reviews


3 Reviews
5 star:
 (1)
4 star:    (0)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:
 (2)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review


4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars An Entertaining Overview
The way this book is set up is very unusual for a textbook and this makes it a very enjoyable read. It would be very easy to just lay out all the concepts in a way that would bore readers to tears but this book goes above and beyond and explains concepts in a highly entertaining way that makes you understand and remember. It is a very good and thorough overview of what...
Published 23 months ago by R. Keeney

versus
19 of 35 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Author unaware of his audience
I am a cartography student. This book is a required text. One of the most important subjects the instructor has taught us is to know your audience in order to make a map that will communicate effectively to them. Upon wading through this text I feel the authors do not know their audience. The book is obviously not meant for an advanced course. It is supposed to be for...
Published on March 15, 2012 by Paul Jameson


Most Helpful First | Newest First

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars An Entertaining Overview, January 30, 2013
By 
R. Keeney (Indianapolis, IN USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Making Maps, Second Edition: A Visual Guide to Map Design for GIS (Paperback)
The way this book is set up is very unusual for a textbook and this makes it a very enjoyable read. It would be very easy to just lay out all the concepts in a way that would bore readers to tears but this book goes above and beyond and explains concepts in a highly entertaining way that makes you understand and remember. It is a very good and thorough overview of what needs to be considered when making maps.

In addition, if you are going deep into the field it has lots of book suggestions to build up your geographic library.

Unlike another reviewer, I highly recommend this book for those who are in the beginning process of learning GIS/cartography (or if you are just a geo-geek).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


19 of 35 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Author unaware of his audience, March 15, 2012
By 
Paul Jameson (Oceanside, CA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Making Maps, Second Edition: A Visual Guide to Map Design for GIS (Paperback)
I am a cartography student. This book is a required text. One of the most important subjects the instructor has taught us is to know your audience in order to make a map that will communicate effectively to them. Upon wading through this text I feel the authors do not know their audience. The book is obviously not meant for an advanced course. It is supposed to be for beginners, I guess, like me. But the authors do not seem to have decided what it is they want to communicate. 12 pages are dedicated to cute sayings or poetry. 43 pages are given over to meaningless diagrams that seem more like artwork and do not appear to add to the subject. The book is 256 pages and those useless pages make up over 20% of the book.

The index is full of references to people some of which I have heard of like Roseanne Barr, Norman Mailer, Lee Harvey Oswald and Mark Twain, and many I haven't. What became frustrating was trying to find some references to cartography stuff that were missing while I could find where Norman Mailer is discussed. Who cares? What is the book supposed to be? a text on cartography or a social treatise. I feel the authors want a second career outside cartography.

Some statements were questionable like saying the Gaza Strip is not part of Israel. It may not be for long, but it is now. The authors are PhDs and should at least know what is generally known. Another misstatement is "one degree of latitude is always 69 miles..." True if you round off to the units place, but it is not absolutely true. 1 deg lat at the equator is 68.7 miles and at 80 degrees it = 69.4 miles. A minor point to be sure, but their statement was an absolute, which is wrong.

I know something about comparing apples to apples. If one wants to make a comparison, in order for it to make sense, everything has to be kept constant while only one variable is changed. Sometimes their method of analysis does not make sense. For example in chapter 8 on Map Generalization and Classification, pages 152 - 154, the subject is Data Classification. To make their points they show 4 series of maps covering Qualitative Point data, Qualitative Line data, Quantitative Point data and Quantitative line data. The first series (Qualitative Point data) of maps violate the basic comparison rule, whereas the other 3 series' do not. The first three maps in the first series are titled "Most Important Social Issues, Community Social Concerns and Predicted Party Affiliation. Three different maps showing different data. But the other three series titles are consistent: Tourist roads, tourist roads, tourist roads; Toxins, toxins, toxins; and Speeds, speeds and speeds. In the latter 3 series Tourist roads, and then Toxins and then Speeds are kept constant and the changes in the way the mapping is done clearly shows why in each case the latter map is the better one. However, in the first everything changes from map to map. Each data point changes and conveys something different. One cannot understand how the last map (Predicted Party Affiliation) is better than the one showing Most Important Social Issues.

In chapter 9 on page 196 the subject is Surface Maps. The definition for Isopleth maps is given, but Isorythmic maps are not mentioned. Reading their definition of Isopleth maps sounds a little like the definition of Isorythmic maps. The confusion comes from the fact that both deal with surface maps. Isopleth maps have constant value contour lines whereas the Isorythmic maps deal with shading of colors to indicate the changes in the surface values. And even though they define Isopleth maps, they show Isorythmic maps as examples (???). Bottom line the book is not the quality I would expect from authors who apparently have high qualifications. The book is more akin to a undergraduate term paper.

There are places where the writing is good and allows the reader to learn something, then the style gets weird, or parenthetical or changes person, or there are missing sentences. I don't know how to categorize it. Just strange.

They include a map of the flight of the voyager in each chapter and show why it is good according to the subject of that chapter. That is a good approach. I can learn by looking at the map.

But finally, they include a picture of an ugly naked woman. Hey guys if you are going to show naked women, at least include ones worth looking at.

I would not recommend the book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 15 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Absolutely USELESS, February 7, 2013
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Making Maps, Second Edition: A Visual Guide to Map Design for GIS (Paperback)
This book is better being burned. I got nothing out of this so-called "book" and still managed to get an A in the class. For some reason, the authors think that pretty pictures and uniquely formatted text is supposed to be meaningful. I think stabbing myself in eye would have been more educational.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


Most Helpful First | Newest First

Details

Making Maps, Second Edition: A Visual Guide to Map Design for GIS
Making Maps, Second Edition: A Visual Guide to Map Design for GIS by John Krygier (Paperback - March 23, 2011)
$52.00 $39.79
In Stock
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Search these reviews only
Send us feedback How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you? Let us know here.