Map scales (again!)

[Mrs H]

A couple of thoughts
The personal experience of myself and Mr H is that the M/W 45 map scale change is about right for the normal sort of age related sight deterioration. Mr H now uses a magnifier and/or specs I choose a single x1.25 contact lens. i don't think either of us could comfortably cope with a 1:15000 map now.

I thought map scale was not simply a case of 'blowing up" or scaling down a map but that the area had to be surveyed at both scales to make sure that the relevant material was used without making the map unreadable at either scale (i.e simplification at 1:15000 if necessary).

I completely cocked up at the weekend's MADO (my garden is on the map ) because I forgot the scale was 1:7500 despite putting a sign up informing everyone else that was the case
Interestingly - in my capacity as the smiling face at enquiries I have on several occasions experienced objections from older age classes running on 1:10,000 maps that the younger classes on the same course were not bering given 1:15000 maps presumably as a disadvantage (and once by someone complaining about their daughter on the same course not being disadvantaged in this way)

[Scott]

I thought map scale was not simply a case of 'blowing up" or scaling down a map but that the area had to be surveyed at both scales to make sure that the relevant material was used without making the map unreadable at either scale (i.e simplification at 1:15000 if necessary).

It's a common misconception.

1.4.2 If the Planner and Controller are in agreement then a 1:15,000 map may be enlarged to 1:10,000 for use by classes M/W45 and above and M/W14 and below.

ie an area should be mapped to be legible at the smallest scale used for an event (eg 1:15k), and then simply enlarged for any other scales that are to be printed (1:10k, 1:7.5k, etc). When the reverse happens, we end up with BOC07-style maps .

[graeme]

From the BOC2008 website...

The maps will probably be 1:10,000 for all classes or possibly 1:7,500 for older classes. A decision will be taken by BOF mapping group soon…. Watch this space.

The map, presumably, is unreadable by the elites at 1:15,000.

Enjoy.

...and if you have a view, don't just moan here, contact mapgroup@britishorienteering.org.uk.

Graeme

[SJC]

A decision will be taken by BOF mapping group soon

If the elite need a 1:10,000 map in order to be able to read it, then common sense dictates that the older classes should have it enlarged in the same way that it would be if the elite map was 1:15,000.
So how do we persuade the mapping group to do the sensible thing and give all the older classes 1:7,500 ?

( Alternatively the organisers / planners could avoid all the aggrevation they will get if they don't provide an enlarged map by declaring independence for Scotland and doing it anyway. )

[Neil M40]

are we really now saying that a recent map by one of most highly respected mappers in the country is somehow not suitable for racing on?

My eyesight is, thankfully, pretty good. I don't think there were any issues with the 1:10000 map - it was not too cluttered and (for me anyway) quite readable on the run, despite the laser printing. I don't think you could argue that there was anything wrong with the basic map as supplied by the mapper for use at 1:10000. The issues are around how it was reproduced and who got the enlargements.

Given a choice between the 1:10000 map and enlarged 1:7500, I would take the 1:10000. Provided the detail is legible enough the smaller scale is always going to be preferable - it's easier to get the bigger picture.

[awk]

I do agree Neil - it wasn't about the quality of the map which I found excellent. I also agree about choice of scale: I used to much prefer 1:15k compared to 1:10k, and would still do so if I could read it on the run. It is only the onset of the problems of older age eyesight issues that has made me find the larger scales preferable. And, as has been emphasised, that means an enlargement, not an ever more detailed and often cluttered map.

On the issue of BOC08 scale - I really appreciated the 1:7500 map at the Six Day. That is an area that justifies the larger scales.

[oconor]

With M45 eyesight, I was OK on the M45S course at Bouth which was 1:7500. As a beginner to orienteering, I found even this map quite challenging.
The issue seems not to be scale but clarity and readability which is a function of the mapmakers' and printers' skills.
Key for older eyes seems to be not the scale, but that a suitable map has been initially drawn at a usable lower scale (1:10000, 1:15000) and then has been enlarged (without cramming in any more detail).

Having been orienteering for only 3 months, it is not clear to me that some of the modern orienteering maps are better than some of the older maps. More features does not necessarily equal better map. I would expect the mapping guidance to detail the maximum density of features per mm. If that density is exceeded, then you need a larger scale/bigger map.

Even on the 1:7500 Bouth map, in some areas there are 4 features: two contour lines and two knolls in 2mm ie 0.5mm per feature. Is there any benefit in having more than 1 feature (of the same colour) per mm?

Comparing the Tankersley and Bouth maps, both at 1:7500, with equally dense features, the Tankersley map looks much clearer because it is printed in matt on waterproof paper with slightly finer line features and slightly subtler colours, rather than a gloss print on the Bouth map with thicker lines which gives a bit of a glare. Gloss printing degrades readability, for me, at least.

There are scales for near sight reading acuity (when siting stationary at rest). I dont think orienteering should rely on competitors having exceptional visual acuity. This disenfranchises those with normal vision, let alone those with poorer eyesight.

Are maps for C3 events and higher ever quality assured for readability?
Have the mapmakers possibly lost the plot?

Maybe controllers should only be allowed to set out course using 3/4 size maps ie if the competitor is being given an A4 map, the controller must use a map no bigger than 17x23 cm. That would stop them using impossible to read maps!

Rory

[Adventure Racer]

So how do we persuade the mapping group to do the sensible thing and give all the older classes 1:7,500 ?

Surely the sensible thing is for it to be mapped such that the older classes are OK with 1:10,000 (normally done by mapping so it is legible for youngsters at 1:15,000!)

[SYO Member]

It's ironic that this debate is taking place because although I had no part in the production of the Tankersley map (it was done entirely by Neil Northrop), I was party to the decision to make it 1:7500.

One of my emails to Neil included the comment 'Not often you get a 7,500 for a Regional but let's be controversial!', and I honestly thought we might get criticised for doing this.

[distracted]

The British website now has the information:

All classes will use 1:10,000 scale maps

[Oldman]

My head is spinning with all this!

Can we please get clarity (preferably from BOF Mapping or Rules Groups) as to:
1. What the current Rules require (regardless of what those who think they know better say should be changed).
2. Whether any recent events had map scales that were not according to the Rules.
3. What action will be taken regarding any events listed in answer 2.
4. Whether any review of the Rules is planned.

Personally, I don't think it is ever necessary (even for us oldies) to have scales larger than 10,000 unless the area is fiendishly complex. If 7,500 is required, then everyone else should be on 10,000.

Also, if you use scales of 7,500 (or perish the thought, larger), people expect much more detail on the map which then leads to illegibility and demands for larger scales.

Believe me, I wear glasses and can still cope with 15,000 (as I sometimes have to) on all but complex areas. The justification for many scales (and larger scales) is much overstated.

[Scott]

I can't answer for the rest, but for your point 1 you want Appendix H of the BOF Event Guidelines, section 1.4, which is fairly clear - the most relevant point perhaps being that you can use as large a scale as you like for events at C3 and below, though "care should be taken that this does not result in over-mapping".

[SJC]

Personally, I don't think it is ever necessary (even for us oldies) to have scales larger than 10,000 unless the area is fiendishly complex. If 7,500 is required, then everyone else should be on 10,000.

And this is precisely the position that this year's BOC seems to have got itself into.
Having decided that the area is so complex that it needs to be mapped at 1:10,000 for the Elite, then logic says that the over 45s should get a map enlarged to 1:7,500.
But for some reason they seem to have decided not to do this.
Would anyone like to explain this decision ?

[awk]

Frankly, I am absolutely gutted that the British is using 1:10,000 for the older classes. The 1:7500 at the Six Day was excellent - having seen the 1:10k it was very difficult to read on the run with 'older' eyes, and will bias the competition very much in favour of those who have retained that eyesight.

If it is deemed necessary for the elite to have a 1:10k map, then a 1:7.5k is a must. On this information (unless there is something we don't know) this is a thoroughly bad decision.

I was really looking forward to Culbin. Not now, and I will seriously have to consider whether it is worth the hassle and cost - as I said this issue affects my enjoyment of orienteering that much.

Oldman: whether you wear glasses or not is irrelevant. I have worn them for over 40 years. It's what happens in later life (usually starting in mid to late 40s) that makes the difference: the eye muscles lose their ability to adjust fast, and the eye loses the ability to resolve information as quickly and close to. If it hasn't happened - just wait!

[IanD]

Having a separate map box for each scale would be a safer bet, but one objection that springs to mind is the need to double the redundancy required when printing

If we went that way, no need to increase the total number of maps printed, simply those who don't pre-enter before the maps are printed have their choice restricted to whatever is still available.