Cops: Columbia Prof Punched Woman In "White Privilege" Brawl
Citibank To Charge All Accounts That Drop Below $1,500
Despite Gay Brothers, State Sen. Diaz Still Anti-Gay Marriage
GoCaGa, BoHo, iTri, And Other New Neighborhood Names
Bronx Teacher Suspended For Assigning Story On Masturbation
But when he showed up at the agency’s Midtown offices with copies of his work, they were quick to find fault with it. According to Christopher Boylan, the transportation authority’s executive director of corporate and community affairs, who recalled the meeting, the main criticism was that Mr. Jabbour’s map, like Mr. Vignelli’s, was artistic but geographically inaccurate.Reading the profile of him in The New York Times, it's easy to see that Eddie Jabbour is not a man easily deterred. The graphic designer for Kick Design continues to work on his map nights and weekends, asking his 17-year-old daughter, Ellie, for feedback every weekend when he prints out another revised variation of his design.“He’s a good designer and it’s an interesting map,” Mr. Boylan said. “The design is important, but the thing we’re concerned with is the best directional guidance. We design a map for use, not solely to look good, and we think it looks good.”
We like the KickMap design. The New York City subway was the first system to run both local and express trains on the same lines, and continues to be the only system with that design. This can make the system baffling to those unfamiliar with the subway, as confused riders stare at single lines populated with multiple letters and numbers signifying where a train may or may not stop and let them off. We'll admit to having the same trouble when riding an unfamiliar subway line. Criticisms that Jabbour's map is geographically inaccurate and won't let riders know exactly where they are when leaving a station seem misplaced, as a lot of people have trouble figuring out which direction they're facing when leaving a station and generally use street-level signage for that type of orientation.
This is the post and discussion from subway foamer blog live from the third rail that is actually mentioned in the Times article as encouraging Mr. Jabbour. Here is an exhaustive chart of subway map designs and variations with Frequently Asked Questions of NYC Subway. And, of course, Mr. Vignelli is designer Massimo Vignelli, who also developed the 1972 map and introduced some new typography choices. This page features a full-map comparison of the Kick Map and the current MTA design, with multiple links to close-up comparisons.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Is there a link anywhere to the full map?
Please link to the actual map. Many Gothamist posts include plenty of secondary sites but still neglect to link to the subject discussed.
Please link to the actual map. Many Gothamist posts include plenty of secondary sites but still neglect to link to the subject discussed.
I've added a link to a full-map comparison of the Kick Map and the MTA's current design. Navigating upwards from the linked page shows a range of other close-up comparisons.
It looks like a "Dumbed down" version of the current map . Seriously, I'm trying not to be the antagonist here, But the current map is fine the way it is . I was born here and used the subways for as long as I can remember and never had a problem reading the map ! I guess if that many people are having a problem with it then oh well .
The distances in Astoria look misleading, Queens Plaza and Queensboro Plaza are quite literaly on top of each other in reality. While Ditmars BLVD is pretty far from Steinway st. Not that they need to be 100% accurate distance wise, but this just seems misleading.
It looks like a "Dumbed down" version of the current map . Seriously, I'm trying not to be the antagonist here, But the current map is fine the way it is . I was born here and used the subways for as long as I can remember and never had a problem reading the map ! I guess if that many people are having a problem with it then oh well .
It looks a lot better to me. I still have problems with express and local after living here for 3 years. Why he's bothering the MTA I don't know. Set up a website and sell the damn thing. I would buy it.
He can't sell it without MTA approval.
having given hundreds of tourists directions over the past few years, I'd vote for the kick map for them any day.. Given they generally know where they want to go from and to (or maybe to somewhere), this map facilitates that much better. As well as giving a clear distinction of local/express trains in an international way (i.e. not language dependent)
It also simplifies it to mainly subway info.. Less of the other.. Not that the MTA map isn't great for locals.. But how great can a map be if it takes years to understand it all.. ?
The new map is too Vignellian, and I despised the Vignelli map.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Isn't part of the fun of taking the subway the knowledge that you might end up anywhere? And isn't the fun of living in NYC watching tourists get completely fed up in the subway system?
I like the new map, but would go for more reliable service as opposed to a new map (why does the E train go to 2nd Ave on the weekends & why is it not posted anywhere conveniently-accessible on the MTA's service change page?)
In my view, the best maps -- some of the best of the city period -- are the MTA Bus maps. Either subway map will show you how to get to subway stations, but not desintations.
The bus maps, especially Manhattan, are geographically correct, show distances, more streets, neighborhood names, and destinations.
The downside, of course, is that they only show one borough at a time. Then again, you are typically going to only one borough at a time, or between your home borough and Manhattan.
I'd like to see the subway lines made more prominent, and subway infornation added to, the bus maps, with the maps made somewhat larger if that would cause crowding.
It should be noted that the MTA's version of the map is also geographically incorrect. For example, have a look at the L train compared to the onnyturf map (which should be correct, as it is layered over the google map)
The London subway map has been praised for being one of the best design-wise. It's really easy to follow -- purely because it's not geographically accurate. If the MTA moves away from being geographically accurate, it just might produce an easy-to-read map.
I like the kick map -- especially for lower Manhattan. Despite being a frequent NYC visitor, my eyes glaze over whenever I try to decipher that rat's nest of lines in the current MTA map for lower Manhattan.
I'd BUY a kick map, if I could get one in Penn Station, for example. If the MTA doesn't want it, Mr. Jabbour should start selling it himself. Let the market operate.
wow...proof positive this site is overrun by out of towners...which means that the upper middle class in nyc is overrun by out of towners which means that poor and middle class new yorkers are getting screwed
the subway map isn't geographically correct, it warps geography to better show the routes. however, the kick map does away with contours and edges in favor of slick looking vector edged landmasses.
one of the great things about the current subway map is that it still maintains the little nooks and crannies that have nothing to do with the subway, so you can look at that little island, peninsula, or bay and ponder over what it is and get a feel for how much is really out there. how many new comers that would only see the kick map would ever find out about city island or the gowanus canal? probably not many, but those are things that add personality to the city that'd be lost in favor of a map that may or may not be easier to use at only the first glance.
the tube map in london is not geographically accurate, yet is probably the easiest to read map of any mass transit system.
the london transit authority has, at their museum, a comparison of the geographically accurate and current transit maps, and the difference is striking. the geographically accurate map is nearly impossible to read!
I find it strange that some people are clamoring for a geographically accurate subway map. One can buy/carry multiple maps if one wants a more representative view of all the "nooks and crannies" as one poster put it. And I wouldn't disagree that those are useful details; I just would argue that that level of detail is not needed in a subway map.
Were the map geographically accurate, would that often affect the subway route(s) a rider would take? I think not.
The new map design presented is wildly misinformative, but it was a smart decision to color code all the boroughs (unlike our current map).
I would favor a more geographically accurate version of the 1970's map (which would be a challenge to design), with individual lines listed on the back, indicating street corners for each station. But the map is pretty good as it is .... I think one of the best ways to improve the NYC subway system would be improved signage in the stations. Current Station signage sucks. That would be a better use of funds in my opinion.
That having been said: one of the obvious advantages of the kick design is that it makes transfer opportunnities and route density far more obvious, which may be a worthwhile tradeoff.
I really like this new design. Is there a PDF or high-res JPG/GIF/whatever version floating around anywhere?
Absolute best map was at nycsubway dot org. Both in terms of visual appeal and in terms of usability. Tragically the last update to that was in 2005 but it's still better than anything else I've seen in print or online.
The kickmap emphasizes the tunnels but de-emphasizes the stations. This is bad. Why? Because people enter and leave STATIONS; you can't burrow underground and hop on a train, so why make the tunnels so prominent?
When people look at a map, they find Point A first, then find Point B, THEN they trace the route.
This is why the London tube map is great--they make the STATIONS clear.
I'd just like to point out that the current subway may is NOT geographically accurate, and for a very good reason. Quite simply, it vastly overstates the size of Manhattan in relation to the other boroughs. It does so out of necessity, however, due to the fact that all the lines in the city (save the G) converge on a tiny sliver of land. Thus, it's impossible to have a truly geographically accurate subway map, so talking about it seems kind of ridiculous.
The KickMap design has its advantages. When I first started riding the subway in high school, I probably would have been well-served by the line separations, but I quickly got the hang of it. So I don't really see any particular problem with the current map; I really could go either way on this.
I love that the NY map shows the geography rather than just a schematic like London/Boston/Paris/Berlin/etc. It may be especially useful because of the consistency and geometry of NYC streets, but it makes finding the best stop to use a breeze when trying to get somewhere, even if it is distorted in reality.
This map shows the subway routes and connections very legibly, but at the expense of everything else. It treats the subway as if it were an isolated, abstract entity utterly disconnected from the city streets it runs beneath.
Subway riders -- who are usually completing part of their trip on foot -- are better served by a map which accurately displays actual distance. For example, many destinations are reachable by multiple subway lines. But using only this "Kick" map, or its Vignelli predecessor, one would have no idea which is a closer walk. Obviously, the current MTA map is far from perfect in this regard, but this thing is much, much worse.
First off, for those that want a link to the map, is it that hard to use google and type in KICK MAP?
Secondly, a few people have said nothing is wrong with the current map. You have also lived here alll your life. When I have guests here (I have lived here for 10 years) they look at the subway map and directly look back at me. It is confusing to newbies. The Tube in London has a similar map to the Kick version and it is EASY to get around in London.
If the city is too blind to see that an "outsider" has a better view then they do, the problem is not with the subway maps, it is with the politicians and decision makers in New York.
I like the current map, but I wish it showed district boundraries like the kick map does.
Hey, I liked the Vignelli map. Still have one framed on my wall, in fact.
I have never had a problem with the current map, even when I first moved here 6 years ago and lived in Queens. I think it gives you a nice blend of readability and topography. The "make it more geographically-correct" argument is a weird one (on the one hand who cares, and the current one isn't either), but I do agree that making it so one can accurately judge walking distances is a benefit- the current map does this well.
I just don't think the current map is confusing. The suggestion to instead invest in signage, particularly inside the stations, is a good one. That could use some help.
Hey, I liked the Vignelli map. Still have on framed on my wall, in fact.
And notice that the MTA had a completely different attitude back then. From the page on the 1972 map, a spokesman said, "We tried to make sure that nothing unnecessary distracts the eye from the subway routes. There’s no sense in using a transit map for geography lesson.”
Check out http://kickmap.com/ for a full comparison of the Kick Map and the Current MTA map design. Cheers!
What about this NYC subway map, drawn in the style of the London Underground:
www.columbia.edu/~brennan/subway/SubwayMap.gif
I prefer the current map. I've also had to use the London map, and hated it.
As others have pointed out, a geographically accurate map makes it easier to plan the best route. It gives you some idea of how long the train will take to get to your destination, and how far you have to walk. With the London map, its easy to pick the station farther away from a location between two lines.
There are also advantages to showing all the routes separately, but they are negated by the MTA's practice of running and then discontinuing express service periodically on some routes, and in changing secondary routes. Right now, you would need separate maps for the weekdays and weekends.
If we ever get the money to reconfigure the subway system, I would like to see express and local trains run on separate lines, and to incorporate the PATH and the JFK airport train into the express service. You could then charge separate fares for express and local service, which I think is a better way of adjusting fares for distance travelled than the zone system used in other cities.
I like that london, but only because it shows connections into NJ as well as the AirTrain.
I consider myself somewhat of a typical tourist who frequently relies on public transportation during my visits, so correct me if I'm wrong in this method...
I'd like to go to destination X. I refer to a travel guide or other readily available info to determine what subway station is most convenient. I then make my way to said station, referring to subway maps and signage, get off, and immediately locate a posted street-level geographic map to orient myself and proceed to destination X on foot.
If this process is typical, then the Kick map is perfect. It assumes people know what station is their destination, which I would argue is the case 90 percent of the time. The purpose of the Kick map is to aid people in navigating a complex subway system to reach a desired station.
Like I stated earlier . It's a "Dumbed down" version of the map ! How simple is to look for the line you need to go where you want . It boggles the mind every weekend when I see the very same people that are for this change standing their looking clueless as to where they want too go . There was this couple from Belgium that were trying to get too the city from Jamaica on the (F) train . They got too Jackson Hts. and for some reason got off the train and transferred too the (E) . You could tell they were from out of town as they stood their looking around trying to read the map . Finally when the train got to Steinway I walked over to them and offered to help them out . They asked why the train was stopping at this stop when it wasn't suppose to . I explained that sometimes when the MTA has the (G) stopping at Court Sq they run the (E) local . They looked at me and said "But the map says it's suppose to go express" . I asked where they wanted to go and told them to take this train to Penn Station and walk back too [6]th. Avenue . I didn't have the heart to tell them too transfer @ [7]th. Avenue to the (D) they were befuddled as it was riding the subway . The point here is they had a map before them and spent the better part of two hours riding back and forth between Jamaica Estates, & Jackson Hts. because the conductor stated that the trains next stop was Roosevelt Island . They didn't understand how the train wasn't going too the city .(Whatever the hell that means)It's just people paying attention to things and following directions that's the problem here, Not the map !
The London map is a triumph of design. However, as others have noted above, the Kick map shares the London Journey Planner's biggest flaw: lack of geographical accuracy. A tourist in London might well decide to take the tube between the Bank and Mansion House stations, based on the tube map -- they appear to be some distance apart, but are actually about 200 yards apart down Cannon Street from each other.
I think the current New York map has a pretty good balance between geographical considerations and showing how the lines connect.
What I notice tourists being confused by (and I've only lived here a little over four years, so it confuses me sometimes too) is when the MTA does random or bizarre things like running an E train into an N/W/R station or making cryptic and unhelpful announcements that don't actually answer the questions that users have.
(What I do wish the MTA would do is publish a book of the area maps (by Michael Hertz) that you find in the stations. They're great, and show you the rough layout of each station, stairway locations, bus routes, street numbering, and local landmarks without being too busy. All the Manhattan ones have same scale, too, so it wouldn't be too hard. Howver, the MTA says they have no plans to do such a thing.)
I think the KickMaps map is not so good. The current map is great. If you are headed someplace new on a train and paying attention to the map, you can notice subtle things. The curves are great. Little things like the sudden curve right after 42nd st on the 4,5,6 southbound. The current map lets you understand why and when you are turning. Pretty helpful for me especially in weird places when the E starts going East after 42nd st. Kickmaps might be good for tourists, but honestly, sell it to lonelyplanet or someone else.
Well, seeing as how the main criticism of the Boston MBTA map is that it doesn't correspond to real geography very well... at least this one shows the boroughs, and not just the train lines against a white background.
Still, I think the crucial thing is not to redesign the map, but to redesign the routes!If you didn't have the 4, 5, and 6 interconnecting with the N, R, and Q, but instead just had the green and the yellow (with or without memorable names), wouldn't that be simpler?
Line maps like they have in most other cities, showing you just the line you're on, and all the stops in either direction, would also simplify things a lot.
My problem isn't decyphering the routes (but I have lived here all my life) but more the issue of the lines' schedules. A lot of the trains don't run all the time, or only at rush hour, or go local after a certain hour, and the key for that kind of info is pretty confusing. I couldn't find a link on this site to the full map though, maybe it has that info somewhere.
I don't have problems figuring out the current map, but lots and lots of people do. There is a problem - using oneself as the sole determinant is a thoughtless thing to do, and is probably why most of you are NOT designers!
The argument that geographical hints (not accuracy) matters is spurious; the overwhelming usage mode of NYC subway maps is from within the subway system, not street level, and the people using them at street level are estimating how to get from station A (the one closest to their current location) to station B (the they already know to be closest to their destination).
If you really need comprehensive door-to-door directions, Hopstop (Google it). Please. Prove that you're actually internet-savvy New Yorkers.
Olusay, I am a New Yorker AND a designer and my concern is not the tourists - let them get lost in the south bronx or better yet stay home - but the locals.
Travis - that wouldn't be as easy as you think since the red line, for example, is 3 separate lines that largely converge in Manhattan but branch elsewhere (and converge with other lines) in the outer boroughs. Hence the letter/number distinctions.
One thing I'd advocate is better neighborhood maps (in proximity to the subway maps) so that when you EXIT the train you can better orient yourself to your destination. Without the WTC it's sometimes hard to figure out which way is which.
And I'll add it would be super helpful if mapquest or google maps included subway locations!
maps.yahooo.com includes subway locations (click on "Public Transportation").
Att: Dave Hogarty
Dave, great survey! I found the comments very interesting and many of them supportive of our now 28 year old map design.
Those who keep referring to London don't seem to get it that the geography of NY is so different that Beck or Vignelli's efforts just don't work here.
I would be happy to expand upon this little state ment if you would allow me some (maybe quite a bit of space).
Get back to me if you are interested.
Thanks,
Mike Hertz, Designer of 1979-today's map
Locals, you've got it all wrong. This isn't a map for tourists. This is a map for you.
The MTA's system of colored lines, black dots, and white dots is based on the express/local dichotomy of Midtown. Each route's color is based on the street it follows through Midtown. Local stops in black, express stops in white. Simple, right?
It's not. "Express" and "Local" actually don't mean that much, as the MTA admitted when they eliminated the "Double letter for local, single letter for express" route names in the 80s. Many routes run express in one borough but local in another. Case in point -- the E train, which is a local in Manhattan but runs express in Queens. The current map is not up to the task of explaining this clearly in any part of the city, but falls particularly flat outside of Midtown.
Furthermore, night and weekend service changes throw the whole scheme out the window. A black "local" dot ends up meaning "some trains stop here sometimes", which is a useless thing to say. But who's most affected by night and weekend service changes? It's not tourists, who benefit from the fact that service in Manhattan doesn't change much on the weekends. It's outer-borough residents, who have to endure truncated service through their boroughs when it's not rush hour. Take a look at the G in Queens and the M in Brooklyn for an example.
The current map makes things a bit harder for tourists who are unfamiliar with the express/local system in Midtown, but it makes things much harder for New Yorkers who are trying to use a part of the system they're a bit unfamiliar with. The Kick map makes it easier for both groups.
I'm honestly a bit puzzled by the commenters who seem to see this as an either-or proposition, a dichotomy between geographic accuracy and Londonian clarity. It's not. Both the Kick map and the current map are somewhere in between perfect geography and Harry Beck. That's appropriate for New York, and I don't fault the MTA for wanting to lose the Vignelli map in favor of something more geographic, but people are treating this like a return to Vignelli. It's not even close, my friends. As the Times said, this is a "hybrid" of Vignelli and the current map, and I think it's better than either of them.
Besides, am I the only one who doesn't find the Kick map to be that much less geographic than the current map? Sure, the shapes and geometry are simplified and smoothed somewhat, but not anywhere near to the extent that Vignelli simplified them. I find this map to be nearly as usable as the current map for geographical purposes.
The Kick map shows, with perfect simplicity, which trains stop where at which times. The current MTA map does nothing of the sort. The whole "white dot/black dot" dichotomy actually tells you very little and breaks down once you leave Midtown.
For the commenter who complains that this is a "dumbed down" version: It's nice that you find it macho to use things that are unnecessarily complex, but many of us value clarity and simplicity. Sure, it's fun to get lost sometimes, but usually it's not.
thanks Noah V (and others) - you really understand and put into words what the Kick Map is all about.
Eddie Jabbour
A step backwards toward the pretty (but confusing) abstraction that was the Vignelli map. If you like this thing, print one out for yourself and carry it around, but I'd be pretty angry if this were posted in subway cars and stations.
Oh, also: for christ sake, come up with a name for your map that DOESN'T sound like an energy drink.