Cartographic Projection
every map is wrong, and by exactly how much
Concept

Conic — where it appears

A projection whose parallels are concentric circular arcs and whose meridians are straight lines radiating from their common centre. The whole family is one construction with one number in it, and the azimuthal and cylindrical families are its two limits rather than its siblings.

Named by 7 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Construction against property. Every projection in the library, sorted by the shape it was notionally rolled from and by what it actually preserves. The families do not line up with the properties: cylindrical and pseudocylindrical and pseudoazimuthal and azimuthal and conic each contain projections of more than one kind, which is why the cylindrical–conic–azimuthal taxonomy answers a question nobody has. Three entries are picked out: Mercator, Albers equal-area conic, Orthographic.

Cylinders, cones and planes

The standard taxonomy sorts projections by the shape of paper they were notionally rolled from. It is memorable, it is how everyone is taught, and it says almost nothing about the properties anyone actually chooses on.

families · Families The equal-area conic, from cylinder to plane. The largest distance between the conic at cone constant n and each of its two limits, over a shared grid, with the free scale and offset removed. Both fall as the FIRST power of the distance from their end — the slope on these axes is one — so the conic is never nearly cylindrical: halving n only halves the difference. At n = 0.999999 the conic is the Lambert azimuthal to 1.3e-6, and at n = 0.000001 it is the Lambert cylindrical to 1.2e-6.

The conic is the whole family

Cylindrical and azimuthal are usually presented as two of three families beside the conic. They are the two ends of it. One parameter runs from the cylinder to the plane, and both limits are exact rather than suggestive — which is measurable, and measured here.

families · Families The taught rule against the measurement, on 30 regions. Each cell is a region built to order — a box of the stated height and width-to-height ratio, centred at the stated latitude — with the family that actually scores best over it, and whether that is what the rule says. Every family is given its own parameters for the region: the conic its cone constant, the cylindrical its standard parallel and the choice of a normal or transverse axis, the azimuthal its centre. The rule is right on 19 of 30, and where it is wrong it is wrong in one direction: it keys on latitude, and what decides the answer is shape.

The rule of thumb, scored

Cylindrical near the equator, conic in the middle latitudes, azimuthal at the poles. It is the most repeated piece of practical advice in cartography and it has never been run against a population of regions. Run against thirty, it is right nineteen times, and every one of its failures has the same shape.

wrong · Audit Two rules, three populations. The taught rule keys on latitude; the replacement keys on shape. On the thirty regions the replacement was read from it scores 83 per cent against the taught rule's 63. On forty-five different regions built the same way it scores 91 — higher, not lower, so the generalisation the shortfall doubted is real. On the seven named regions this collection actually uses, both rules score 29 per cent, and following either costs a mean factor of 14.6. The third bar of each group puts the taught rule's polar clause back into the shape rule, which is what the out-of-sample failures ask for: it repairs four of them, breaks two that were right, and reaches 43 of 45.

The rule scored out of sample

A replacement rule was read off thirty regions and scored on the same thirty, and this collection recorded that as not being evidence about any other thirty. It is: on forty-five different regions the rule scores 91 per cent against the 83 it managed at home. What it cannot do is the seven regions the collection actually uses, where both it and the rule it replaced name the winner twice out of seven and cost a mean factor of 14.6.

wrong · Audit What is left after the best rigid motion of the page. Every projection in the library, rotated about its own symmetry axis by five degrees, with the best rigid motion of the page fitted and the leftover measured against the picture's own size — on a logarithmic scale, because the answers span four orders of magnitude. Fourteen sit at 2e-6 or below, which is the axis search's own floor. Seven sit between 9e-3 and 3e-2. There is nothing in between, so the split is a fact rather than a threshold — and the fourteen are exactly the cylinders, the cones and the planes.

The family is a symmetry, not a shape

Rung seven dissolves the taxonomy: eleven named maps fitted to one perspective formula, six reproduced exactly and five refused, so the developable surface describes how the projections were discovered rather than what they are. What is left is the question it does not ask. If the shapes are not the classification, what is?

families · Families Two members, their average, and the family's best answer to it. Two equal-area conics at cone constants 0.25 and 0.85, the average of the two, and the member of the family nearest that average — at 0.540, which is not the parameter midpoint. The average is not a conic at all: its parallels are still arcs but they are arcs of circles about different centres, so no single cone constant reproduces it and the residual is 0.1722.

A family is not closed under averaging

Nine rungs treat a family as a set of maps with a parameter running through it, and this collection's own compromise projections are averages of members. An average of two members is not a member: two conics far apart average to something 31 per cent of their own separation outside the family — and averaging within a family makes the map worse every time, while averaging across two makes it 16 per cent better.

families · Families A legend saying "illuminated from 315°" is true at one longitude. A hillshade's azimuth is measured from the top of the sheet, because the shading is computed on the projected raster. The top of the sheet is grid north, so the compass bearing the light comes from is the declared azimuth plus the meridian convergence, and that varies across the sheet. On a conic it swings by 55.3 degrees over eighty degrees of longitude. On a cylindrical projection in its normal aspect it does not swing at all, which is the flat line — the only case the legend is right everywhere.

The light comes from a page direction

A hillshade's illumination azimuth is declared from the top of the sheet, and the top of the sheet is grid north. On a conic the light therefore swings 52.6° across eighty degrees of longitude, and 72.8 per cent of the sheet is shaded differently from what the legend claims.

distortion · Gradient

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

AzimuthalAspectCylindricalTaxonomyConeCone constantDevelopable surfaceOptimisationProjection familyCylinderDistortion criterionInvariant

All concepts