ATLAS / PLATE 002

DISTORT A MAP ON PURPOSE

Finding the thin line between optimising a projection and distorting a map using key trade routes.

What would a world map look like if it were built to answer one question well?

context plate notes

PLATE 002 / 003

MERCATOR

LONDON — LAGOS+4.97%

EQUAL EARTH

LONDON — LAGOS+8.44%

OPTIMISED

LONDON — LAGOS+1.55%

MERCATOR11.97%EQUAL EARTH9.99%OPTIMISED2.42%

MERCATOR0.651EQUAL EARTH≈0OPTIMISED0.140

LOWER NETWORK-DISTANCE ERROR / AREA + ANGULAR FIDELITY TRADED AWAY

2.42%

0.140

LOWER NETWORK-DISTANCE ERROR / AREA + ANGULAR FIDELITY TRADED AWAY

PL. 002

INSTRUMENT · PL. 002

§ A / REPRESENTATION

VIEW

TRY THIS

Pick one city pair, then compare the same relationship across all three maps.

READING THIS VIEW

All three maps are being tested against the same declared network. Choose a city pair and read the red error across the three representations. The diagnostics show what that gain costs in other kinds of fidelity.

§ B / RELATIONSHIP · 15

DISTANCE ERROR AFTER BEST GLOBAL SCALE

MERCATOR: +4.97%
EQUAL EARTH: +8.44%
OPTIMISED: +1.55%

§ C / DIAGNOSTICS

	MERC.	EQ. E.	OPTIM.
	11.97%	9.99%	2.42%
WORST PAIR	32.38%	22.90%	4.22%
	0.651	≈0	0.140
	1.00	2.98	4.07

Tradeoff: the optimised map is better under the declared network-distance objective only. It gives up area fidelity relative to Equal Earth and shows the greatest angular distortion of the three.

§ D / COMPUTED PARAMETERS

CENTRE: 53.964574° N, 73.679511° E
AEQD: 0.292805
LAEA: 0.707195

METHOD: Projection mathematics/ optimisation
SOURCE: Computed (Atlas drop 01); display coastline GSHHG
PERIOD: N/A
GEOGRAPHY: World
TYPE: CUSTOM DISTORTION-OPTIMISED PROJECTION

NEXT PLATE003 — LONDON IS BIGGER AT MIDNIGHT →

§ CONTACT

I AM THE ONE WHO KNOCKS.

JK, feel free to reach out below!

ray@sleepingnook.com LinkedIn

PHILOSOPHER | DATA DAWG