The year of waterproof maps

[Roger]

In the course of my annual recording and filing session, I realised that 2007 was the year when waterproof maps became routine. There has been a tremendous variation though, from coarse-textured maps that pick up the mud to shiny plastic affairs that are tricky to handle.

Many of the maps, particularly in the first half of the year, seemed to use the same paper. Ashridge (HH, Jan, printer not stated), Wendover (TVOC, Feb, print5), White Downs (MV, Feb, print5), Holmbury Hill (LOK, Mar, Quickmap), JK (SWOA, Apr, print5), British Relays (WOA, May, print5), SinS (HOC/WRE, May, print5) and Longshaw (DVO, Dec, printer not stated) were all pretty good. The printing was clear and the maps performed well, but they did collect the dirt – alongside the paper ones that had been bagged, my used maps from these events look distinctly grubby.

The Harvester map (KERNO), although also printed by print5, feels much rougher than the other print5 maps. Possibly this is a result of having been left out in the drizzle all night on the map-trees while my team-mates duelled with the darkness, but luckily there wasn’t much mud on the sand dunes and the rough surface didn’t cause me any trouble.

Conversely Gaer Hill (BOK, Apr, BML print), November Classic (SOC, Nov, printer not stated), Oxford City (OUOC, Nov, BML print), West Woods (NWO, Nov, the MapWorks) used a plasticky material that wipes clean very easily and gives excellent legibility, but won’t fold easily. An earlier problem with this sort of the paper was that the ink flaked off on the folds, but these maps show no sign of this – possibly because you can’t make any folds.

Cinq jours de France delivered the ultimate in plastic chic. The maps were very shiny, impossible to fold and so noisy as to be completely useless for insomniac map-geeks, unless your partner is very tolerant or is a very heavy sleeper.

The maps at the O-Ringen (Sweden) were similar to the bulk of the print5 maps, but tend to be a little rougher and therefore more prone to picking up mud. Again, this could be a consequence of inundation.

The Lincoln City Race (LOG, Sep, print5), the Warwick Town race (OD, Oct, print5) and Puttenham (GO, Oct) seemed to use a new smoother paper. It still folds and prints OK, and it repels the mud better than the earlier print5 offerings. In my opinion this is the best of the bunch. Could someone in the know tell us what this is, so that the organisers and planners reading this forum can request it?

Does anyone have any different opinions? Any takers for plastic maps? Anyone prefer the good old days of bagging?

[RJ]

Interesting.... With mud/blood retention, sheets sticking together when wet, non-foldability and loss of print I intend to wait for general acceptance of a particular paper. We print 5/6 thousand maps a year and bag them all; easily enough done, bagging them as they are printed. We tried the waterproof papers some years ago and were generally disappointed by the general faults above. But technology and quality will improve and without doubt we will be printing on a waterproof paper in the end.

The cost differential is in favour of the bagged map. With time I would suppose that the waterproof paper will come down in price, but that will depend on the general printing industry use, and in particular the supermarkets.

[IanD]

Slightly off-topic, one advantage of traditional bagged maps is that the plastic cases slide past each other readily, making it easy to pick the top one off a pile.

By contrast, waterproof maps tend to stick together, especially if slightly damp. This can make it quite difficult to extract exactly one map from the box at the start of the course. Several times this year, I have wasted several seconds at the start trying to get hold of one map and leave the rest. On at least two occasions, I have discovered while out on my course that I have not succeeded, and am in fact carrying two maps.

On balance, I prefer waterproof maps to plastic-bagged, and this preference will no doubt grow stronger as experience leads to the selection of the best paper and ink combination. However, I would plead with organisers to allocate one start official to the task of separating maps. This person needs to ensure that each map box has one loose map at the top, which of course means revisiting the map box after each competitor. If it's not too windy, the loose map is best laid over the edge of its box. It's not a difficult task, but is best allocated to a younger person who who doesn't mind repeatedly bending down.

[lincolnsteve]

The Lincoln City Race (LOG, Sep, print5), the Warwick Town race (OD, Oct, print5) and Puttenham (GO, Oct) seemed to use a new smoother paper.

Re Lincoln: I have just checked my email archive and can confirm we orderd plain paper, not waterproof, this may explain the smooth texture. Lincoln in Jan was waterproof.

[Tatty]

With reference to Ian's request, each event I've helped in using the waterproof maps whilst raining has designated an official to separate the maps. I did it for two hours in torrential rainat an SOC event in February
Personally I prefer these type of maps despite the folding difficulties. Saves hours on bagging for an event like the Classic where there are over 1000 maps to sort out.

[NeilC]

Slightly off-topic, one advantage of traditional bagged maps is that the plastic cases slide past each other readily.

They certainly do, which as any JK/BOC etc planner will tell you is a real pain when you are trying to work with several thousand bagged maps sorted into 20+ courses.

Another advantage of not bagging is when a last minute map correction is deemed necessary and bags don't have to opened and re-sealed.

My own club print our maps onto Pretex which is fine for district and regional events. I'm happy that the current batch of waterproof maps are all usable but as Roger points out they all currently seem to have their advantages and disadvatages.

[Simon E]

We've come a long way since September last year!

The best paper I've come across recently was that used by SLOW at the Devil's Punchbowl event, but it's another of those maps with no named printer. It may just have been slightly thicker than some of the other maps.

The shiny noisy paper mentioned by Roger (November Classic, Oxford, etc.) strikes me as being like Emit. Technically quite good but intensely annoying for the user. I really hope it doesn't catch on.

[D,J,J&Ms Dad]

Thanks for the comments - we do print a large number of maps and have standardised on the thicker, smoother water-resistant material now. The Harvester used the last of our older type of Pretex with the rough surface. We don't intend purchasing that product again.
Simon - your comments are appreciated. We also printed the Devil's Punchbowl (OK Nuts) maps. I am afraid I sometimes do not add a 'printed by' either through lack of time or just forgetting until too late - maybe that'll be my new year's resolution.

Alan
Print5

[greywolf]

Earlier this month whilst out on a training trundle i found a discarded Scottish 6 Days map which had presumably lain there in the heather since August. It was folded twice; the outside half showed some fading - all the yellow had gone and the green turned a sort of pale blue, but the inside half looked almost as good as new, very little sign of deterioration.
Not sure what type of paper was used - but obviously ideal for very very long-o

[The Loofa]

[quote="Simon E"]

The best paper I've come across recently was that used by SLOW at the Devil's Punchbowl event, but it's another of those maps with no named printer. It may just have been slightly thicker than some of the other maps.

Alan beat me to it - yes that was Print5
At SLOW we have only looked at 2 main suppliers so far - Alan at Print 5 and Nigel at BML
Nigel's is the shiny difficult to fold stuff, but (allegedly) better in wet/mud
Alan's is rougher, easy to fold, but (again allegedly) less likely to be readable after getting muddy

Each time we have used Alan so far we have had really good weather - so we've decided to ride our luck on that count for the time being, and if we do get a bad experience, review it then (well it's either that or keep reading this thread in the hope of learning something)

Andy

[Big Jon]

Why not ask Stirling Surveys about waterproof paper -they have used it all year and printed tens of thousands of maps.
Simon E's - re your snidey comment about Emit - what rattled your cage this morning - scared its better than SI?

[kedge]

I agree that BML's paper is a bit on the noisy side and can be difficult to fold. But maps printed on it are beautifully crisp and sharp and the material seems almost indestructible. And you do get used to the folding problem with practice. If you really want waterproof maps, this stuff, as the advert says, 'does what it says on the tin'.

In March I controlled an event in the New Forest where after two day's continuous use in a very muddy and wet forest, including heavy and continuous rain all through the Sunday of the event, my all controls map looked almost like new. Any mud just wiped off.

In November we used the material for the maps for the British Schools Championships at Bovington, when the best part of two inches of rain fell during the day of the event. Again, the maps stood up to the conditions admirably.

[DJM]

I believe that Airienteers have also been experimenting with a waterproof paper which looks remarkably like that used by BML (the same perhaps?). It's sold by Xerox and is called Never Tear - 145 micron (200 gsm) thickness is used. The print quality is excellent but its foldability provides the familiar problem.

However, I'm curious as to why such thick paper is being used (by both BML and AIRE) as Never Tear also comes in 120 micron (155 gsm) and 95 micron (125 gsm) thicknesses too. Surely these should be more suitable ... or is there a problem that's not generally known about use of thinner papers?

[roadrunner]

I thought the map at Ash Ranges was as good as any I've seen in this respect - relatively easy to fold, and the print was clear and didn't come off on the folds. With the lovely weather, though, I don't know how it would perform when wet. There wasn't a printer's name that I could find - could someone from SN please let us know who printed it, and on what paper?

[MacMan]

Ash Ranges map was printed by Alan at print5 - We have used Alan from the start and at last years SN trophy, on Long Valley the weather was the worst it could possibly be and we had no problem. The club use Alan for all maps at each of our school events (one per month) and have continued to see no problems (touch wood!)