Discussion: How does one become a good mapper?

From the what to do with money thread - Maybe this is a stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway. How does one become a good mapper? Let's say one or more US citizens wanted to fill this lack of mappers, but they currently lack the proper skills. How do they acquire these skills? Are there training classes somewhere? Or do you just learn as you go?

It's not a stupid question but it seems to have sunk without a trace in the other discussion. I'll attempt an answer myself based on my own experience of becoming at least a good enough to make local event maps of QOC terrain mapper but I see no reason others shouldn't address the question while I'm getting around to it.

A very good question. I put the following in the other thread --

-- 2A. Smaller mapping projects by local talent. And here the question was raised as to what we do to develop local mapping talent, and the answer seems to be nothing. So what could be done to move this along? Regional based mapping seminars (i.e. a weekend of instruction). I went to such a thing way back when, and it sure helped a lot. I think something like this may happen at the occasional convention, but why not have one here in New England (and others elsewhere).

It's easy to produce high-quality maps. It's hard to do that in a reasonable amount of time.

Darn, if I had only known it was easy to produce high-quality maps, I'd stop finding it difficult to make average-quality ones.

Just make an average-quality map, then improve on it. Given a finite (or infinite) amount of time, it should converge.

There is nature and nurture. Not every orienteer can make a good map.

About nurture, getting started is best with an apprentice or small-class situation. Tools and techniques and stuff. Then, I think, there's no substitute for doing a lot. Orienteering in a wide variety of terrains and countries, supplementing that with map study now there's so much online, taking part in forums, being open to criticism.

Group map walks with acknowledged experts should be more common IMO. Say 2-4 hours on a particular terrain type, that usu suggests now-and-again sessions as you can't bring terrains close together. Round here there's a specific need to teach geo-referencing of old maps to enable their distortions to be fixed up. Without that, a map may never converge!

I really don't think anyone can make a good map, or that there is necessary convergence from an average map to a good one.

I think a lot of orienteers can produce serviceable maps, but for many reasons, will never produce a great one.

My take on an answer:

1 - Orienteer a lot. Necessary in order to acquire understanding of the mapping specifications and how orienteers expect to see real world things depicted on paper.

2 - If you can find a training class/clinic/mentor, take advantage of them. Whether you can or not, check out the literature on orienteering mapping, both printed and online. No more sense reinventing the wheel in this domain than in most others.

3 - try to make (or update) a map. Evaluate the result. Have others evaluate the result. Revise your map, if necessary.

4 - repeat step 3 and maybe step 2 as well until you're a good mapper.

So, yes, in essence, I think you learn as you go. Perhaps elsewhere there is more formal, organised (edit: I should have used the work "institutionalised" here) training of mappers, maybe even certification, but I haven't heard of it.

Briefly recapping the high points of my own development:

- the first time I set courses for a QOC event, there was a new trail in the terrain that I wanted to use as part of the yellow course. I walked it and drew it by hand in pencil as well as I could in relation to the contours and other features and drew it on the yellow competition maps in red pen.

- a year or two later, course setting again, I resurveyed the outdated trails in an ~0.25 square km portion of one of QOC's maps adjacent to the parking/start/finish in order to be able to make a white course that wouldn't confront newbies with unmapped trails and mapped trails that no longer existed.

- a few years later, two other QOC members and I collaborated on a non-forested university campus map, not strictly complying with ISSOM.

- another few years later, I started fieldwork for a new map of a MD state park, ~4 square kms in size, with a LiDAR base produced by Greg Lennon from county data (sadly, taken during leaf on season, or I would have been saved the trouble of
surveying some contour features, particularly a few lengthy gullies, myself). The map premiered in spring 2008, having taken quite a lot of my free weekend time during the preceding two leaf off seasons and was generally well-received (unsurprisingly, Ted Good wasn't entirely happy with it). Between those two, in 2007, I also did a small amount of fieldwork and cartography touching up some of the eastern side of the map for Day 2 of the US Classic Champs. I'll note that during much of the second leaf off season of fieldwork, the course setter for the premiere event was actively designing courses so I was getting feedback on where he felt work was needed.

- since then, I've done some maintenance on the new map, mostly adding rootstocks that pop up, and some fairly minor updating of two of our existing maps, most significantly dealing with changes to the trail networks.

I don't feel anywhere near the level of ability of the people who can go into the woods with a blank sheet of paper, a compass and some pencils and produce a usable let alone a truly good orienteering map. I'm quite dependent on use of handheld GPS to survey both linear and point features - I think I could produce acceptable results with just compass and pace but I'm sure the new map would have taken me at least twice as long, probably more using those exclusively. That also means I'm faster and presumably the results are at least slightly better working with an accurately georeferenced base map. Nevertheless, given a decent base, I can produce a usable map and I can't see why any other fairly competent (not necessarily fast) orienteer shouldn't be able to do the same if they're motivated and can put in the time (and are temperamentally suited to spending hours at a time walking slowly and standing still in the woods).

Aerial photo FTW.

(and are temperamentally suited to spending hours at a time walking slowly and standing still in the woods).

I think this is one of the less appreciated qualities a mapper needs. Forest mapping is nothing like orienteering itself - on my last project my GPS said I averaged about 2kph moving speed during my 190 hours in the bush. There is a lot of back-and-forth, standing still and attacking the same area from six different directions.

Terrain interpretation can be learned and improved upon, but if you don't enjoy the finicky detail work of fieldworking a complex area, and being alone in the bush for a long time, then you're not going to enjoy mapping.

Not every orienteer can make a good map...

but every map maker needs to be a 'facile' orienteer if not a competitive one. In my mind, both help with making the best of maps.

Back around 20 years ago, Bill Shannon used to put on two intensive four-day orienteering camps every year at Fahnestock in New York. One was an orienteering skills workshop, and the other was a mapping camp. These were attended by people from all over the country. I attended the latter in 1988, when Pat Dunlavey was the instructor. The course covered everything from selecting an area, through getting permission, having a basemap made, fieldwork, drafting (pen and ink in those days), and getting maps printed. Pat had been the instructor I think since the beginning, and a couple of years later he stepped down and I took over. The last year that the mapping camp was held was 1993 (Bill ran it himself that year), and in some ways it can be considered a casualty of WOC93. Years later, I was persuaded to run a reduced version of mapping camp at the USOF Convention. Not everybody who attended these camps became a mapper -- probably most did not -- but I think at least a few good mappers resulted from the program.

I think a sensible programme would include widespread short "kindergarten" courses aimed at beginners who are going to do updates or small park maps; and occasional longer "high school" courses that took the survivors of the above through the whole process. By survivor I mean those who have gone away from kindy and done some mapping so they have confronted some real-life issues. Plus occasional "post-grad" get-togethers but maybe this is best informal and ad hoc. As with club training days, I shudder at the statement "suit all levels".

- Ask lots of questions
- Read the "Junior Mapper's Guide"
- Read the ISOM
- Read J-J Cote's posts on the "O-map" group on Yahoo
- volunteer to update an existing club map

[There is nature and nurture. Not every orienteer can make a good map.]

Couldn't agree more. There is a strong genetic component. And the population with the requisite traits/temperament is quite small.

I feel more on Tundra/Desert's side of the question of how hard making maps is than on the side of those referencing nature vs nurture. I think just about any "'facile' orienteer" could develop the skills to make a serviceable map. Most of them won't be inclined to do so. Most of them, pre-retirement, probably don't have enough free time to do so. Many of them may not be detail-oriented enough (and perhaps a few would be too detail-oriented to tolerate the impossibility of making a map perfect rather than as good as it needs to be to meet the needs of orienteers). Nevertheless, if you're capable of orienteering skillfully, I think the default assumption should be that you could become an adequate-to-good mapper if you really wanted to. Let's not give good orienteers the impression that they very likely don't have the right stuff to be a mapper and shouldn't bother trying.

Addendum: I'll stipulate that I believe there is a strong genetic component to whether someone can become a skilled orienteer. I just don't think that's very relevant to this discussion since I don't think any non-orienteers want to become mappers - it's not like that's where the big bucks are to be made.

A random list of pre-reqisites:
1. Free time. If you feel the need to rush, the map will reflect this.
2. Willingness to be in the forest without training.
3. Ability to concentrate for many hours on end alone. I have found that after two or three hours in complex granite, I am mentally exhausted.
4. The self-discipline to be able to not map that which will make the map hard to read and the creativity to still choose how to represent that which is needed to make the map work. As Eric Andrews describes it on his maps... Bush Art.
I fail on most of these.

I'm hardly qualified to provide input but something that hasn't been mentioned that I would think is very important is the base map. I suppose a really good mapper will make a good map regardless of the base but for the novices, a good base map will make the work easier and better.

I was the one who asked the question, in part because I think I would enjoy mapping if I had enough time to devote to it. I work in a field that is known for cyclical employment ups and downs, so who knows, maybe I'll have a lot of time available in the future... or maybe not.

The other thing that prompted the question was the current abundance of unemployed folks that exist out there. How many of them are in the field of geography/GIS/cartography? It seems like there could be some potential orienteering mappers in that crowd.

Many of them would have the interest and spatial IQ required. There's an ever-increasing availability of detailed aerial photos and LIDAR. And there are powerful tools available: OCAD, GPS-enabled tablets. Sure, they'd need to study up on ISOM and ISSOM, but these new mappers wouldn't necessarily be starting from scratch.

A good basemap will keep a novice mapper from getting frustrated.

An experienced mapper will insist upon the best possible basemap.

Any money/effort that is invested in a top quality basemap will mopre than pay for itself in terms of time saved in the field survey.

I'll also note that the real challenge of mapping is not the "where?", it's the "what?". The tools exist to make it straightforward to know where a feature should go on the map, that's not so hard to learn. The part that takes skill is the nonmechanical part: deciding what to draw and how to draw it. How thick is this vegetation? Is that a boulder or a cliff? Is this small reentrant worth showing with a form line? Is the ground here usually wet enough to be worth showing as indistinct marsh? That sort of stuff takes some orienteering experience to be able to do well.

Novice mappers usually insist on the best possible basemap as well. The difference is that they usually won't get it.

What makes a map "good"?

A compromise between accuracy and readability that doesn't introduce too much ambiguity.

Learning to map:
- Look at as many different styles of maps as possible
- Go for a run on the map before hand and visualise in your mind what the features might look like
- start on simple areas such as a street O map and build up your confidence to harder maps
- go on a mapping workshop with an experienced mapper
- get as good a base map as possible - the better the base map the easier to map
- always start each mapping traverse at a very obvious feature
- finish the traverse at another obvious feature
- examine mappable features from more than one angle
- if you are not sure how to describe a feature come back the next day with a clear head
- for each small sub-area map/draw in order: point features then linear features, then area features such as vegetation
- ENSURE FEATURES are in the RIGHT PLACE- if uncertain triangulate that feature with known features i.e. pace out and take bearings
Placing features in the right place is not always easy on complicated maps. One area I remaped had house sized boulding plotted in a shallow gully 100m from the ridge they actually were. So get it right the first time even if it is slow work.
- getting the interpretation right only comes with practice. Mapping as with any other endevour will only get better with practice.

triangulate

that's so pre-GPS...

pace out

make that pre-rangefinder.

Soooo.... if there are unemployed orienteers and there are clubs with some extra money, perhaps these unemployed orienteers could update existing maps or make new ones if they had guidance from others. This might be good for all involved. I have done some mapping and it is true that you have to like standing still a lot and winter is not the time to map in the north because your fingers and everything else freezes. Mapping is not rocket science but it is demanding. Good maps show the terrain well and allow for people to use the map to interpret t he terrain and move through it with confidence. Maybe the unemployed orienteers should approach clubs for mapping projects.

"How does one become a good mapper?"

Part II could be considered the drawing of the map, the cartographic role. Why "surrender" one's fieldwork to someone else, occasionally with something lost in the interpretation for any number of reasons. It's more satisfying to draw the features one just saw in the forest, esp. when/if one can still hold a mental picture.

Learn OCAD (likely on a similar 'painful' curve as the fieldwork experience but easier to get it right I think) and have control of map/drawing quality when its finally printed (and it's easy to revise anyway). Make it your cartographic expression as well. Something to think about, anyway.

Eveyone probably knows this already but in case they don't---OCAD 6 is available for free.

At this point, there are very few people doing fieldwork who are not drafting it into 0CAD (or whatever) themselves.

... but I doubt if they are using OCAD 6. I would like to recommend learning mappers use a later version of OCAD, but it contravenes the restrictive licencing arrangements. I can understand their need to protect income, but our need is to get beyond the "one or two mapping gurus in the club" and encourage widespread use.

In terms of drawing stuff, 0CAD 6 isn't that different than later versions. You can certainly use it to learn how to operate the drawing tools, at the very least.

Some of our club's maps are still in OCAD-6 format. Many great O maps were drawn using this version of OCAD.
The 2004 USOF Mapping Clinic taught me that great maps are drawn in the woods with colored pencils, not indoors with some fancy computer program.

> great maps are drawn in the woods with colored pencils, not indoors with some >fancy computer program

any examples of such "great maps" in your area?

It says OCAD 6 is not compatable with Windows 7, which is what I'm running these days. I guess I could download the V10 trial and learn it in 21 days? Actually it would probably be more like 6 days since I wouldn't have much time during the work week.

There's also the O-scape, the free mapping plugin into Inkscape (freeware vector graphics software).

I still need to try this out, since I'm a regular Inkscape user (it created all of the logos and t-shirt designs I've done).

Hi FrankTheTank, I installed OCAD 6 on Windows 7 (64 bit). I don' t know anything about drawing maps so I just played around a bit, but I didn't encounter any problems.

On "great maps" above

Of necessity, great maps/all maps get their start in the woods with colored pencils
on mylar (perhaps tablature/gps in field as future default?) but do get their
expression (and continuance) "with some fancy computer program" that digitizes them for easy use/dissemination/updating.

These particular field notes of mine were never bound for glory but I
admit to liking the colors and design of such work in general. "Art
deco" (contemporary decorative art for those with discerning taste:).
A 30" by 40" above the sofa?

You know you're an orienteer when such stuff adorns the living room....

Fanciful works.

This may put you of wanting to map, or just make you more determined

Wow...sure as hell makes me never want to make the map for a WOC. :)

Nice work Bob (bl). Yours is a great map. Many beginners ask what GPS to use, or what software makes those maps. Technology alone will not make a map for you. There is a lot of art involved.

What's this "amazing function of OCAD 10" JiM? Is it something that flags things like sub-minimum distances and sizes etc? Would be handy, kinda like a spell checker.

@Juffy, yes, marginally more scrutiny than your average anal-retentive long-term orienteer has after a run on a new sprint map - but only just.

I just took my first stab at creating an orienteering map and it was a great learning experience. I owe my thanks to the OUSA mapping clinic at the convention this past August- thanks to all who put that on, like Greg, Alex, et al. I'd highly recommend going to that mapping clinic if its offered again, and like other posts here mentioned, get on the mapping e-mail group, and read some of the resources like the JROTC mapping guide, etc. So many of the posts above have excellent advice!

I mapped Western Michigan University's campus at 1:5000 scale for a local sprint event for Nat'l Geography Awareness Week back in Nov. It helped to get quality and detailed GIS data from the university. I wasn't very happy w/ the results and its not up to the quality standards it should be, but it was good enough for a small race held on campus which introduced new people to the sport, and good enough for veteran orienteers to make their way around the map w/o any major issues.

The project took far longer to complete than I expected, mostly because it takes so long to draw in OCAD, but I also had a lot of issues w/ figuring out how to use OCAD to display the way I wanted it it. But as time went on I got better and better at it. I was using the free OCAD 6 version, so that was part of the problem. I hear OCAD 10 lets you import GIS data, which would have saved me many hours of drawing contour lines... but I don't have the $ for OCAD 10, so I had to work with what I have. But now I can improve on it and keep using it in the future.

I am a full-time grad student in 2 Masters programs at 2 universities, a 3/4 time military officer, a business owner, only a semi-successful orienteer, and very busy w/ several other aspects of life that keep me busy outside of orienteering, but even I was able to make a basic sprint O-map within about 2-months time...so I wouldn't discourage anybody from doing an O-map. I'm not saying it was easy and I'm not saying my map was very good, I'm just saying its doable.

However, my warning is that to make a good O-map, it takes a TON of time. I had a deadline to meet and so the mapping work ended up consuming me. I thought that given my know-how in ArcGIS it would be easy to pick up OCAD 6, but I had several moments of frustration...like when it took me 2 hrs to figure out how to get open-scattered trees symbols to layer on top of open-runnable. At the same time, don't let problems at the start discourage you. The more experienced I became at using OCAD, the faster I was getting things done and the easier it became. I have a lot more confidence now than when I saw even half way complete. And again, the base map data makes a huge difference.

I also found mapping to be enjoyable in that it gave me another excuse to spend lots of time running around outside.

And agreed w/ Tundra Des- the map can always improve as you update it as your time and talent allows. Good luck!

What's this "amazing function of OCAD 10" JiM?

OCAD 10 > MAP > SELECT OBJECT BY PROPERTY

but now that you can check minimum sizes like this I think most people will find they regularly draw area features below the minimum size - exactly the point of the table showing compliance of previous WOC maps in Marian Cortitas letter. So it might be time to review these minimum sizes.

Uncle JiM: That open letter doesn't seem very open to me. Google docs won't show the document and I tried several different browsers and computers. Has anyone found a readable copy somewhere?

I read it a few days ago and now can't read it. The level of protection on the document appears to have been changed. I suspect this indicates the saga is continuing.

would have saved me many hours of drawing contour lines

Does OCAD 6 have DXF import? I thought it did. You can convert pretty much everything (particularly ArcGIS, Shapefile, GPX, PostScript, and GeoPDF) to DXF using other tools, and import as DXF. In other words, unless you are starting with pixel contours, there is an easier way that tracing by hand.

Too bad so many regular and semi-regular mappers have this non-data angle hardwired into them, and prefer to hand-trace.

Just remember that DXF imported data is made of of lots and lots of small line segments instead of bsplines. Use the convert to curves tool to make editing(and file size) a lot easier.
Also GIS data from a DXF is generally georeferenced, making it a lot easier to later bring in orthophotos or other basemap layers.

I liked the comment re the TONS of time. Make sure the map is in your back yard!
Don't find some state forest half a state away at $3.20/gallon transportation and a full time job etc to tack on to the mapping project:). '79-80, I did a map 40mi away (not 'bad' distance for age/job description/price of gas - c. 32cpg) - 40 trips Nov to June, 3200 mi driving. Would not look for a place much more than 10 miles away nowadays. Don't live in a city, either. Actually, Heather Williams made a nice map of Central Park a while back. Pick your city carefully, maybe there'll be a decent park to tackle.

$3.20/gallon

Try $1.50/litre ($6.75/gallon)

Different dollars, different gallons, but you make a good point JiM. And petrol is only part of the cost of running a car. Appreciated the article in the AO about Bendigo's innovative close-to-home orienteering formats.

Global Mapper creates DXF data in nice neat curves. MicroDEM makes all those tiny line segments in its DXF files.