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

Representative fraction — where it appears

A map's scale written as a ratio, such as 1:50,000, which is true along the lines the projection holds at true scale and nowhere else. On a screen map it is the equatorial value and is wrong by the secant of the latitude everywhere else.

Named by 11 essays across 6 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

What "1:136,495" means at each latitude, at zoom 12. A screen map at zoom 12 prints one scale for the whole world. The curve is how much larger in scale the map really is, measured from the projection's own derivatives rather than from a formula: at 60° it is 1.98 times, so the map labelled 1:136,495 is a 1:68,765 map. The hollow marks are sec φ, the textbook answer. They do not sit on the curve — the worst gap is 9949 parts per million at 85° — because Web Mercator puts a geodetic latitude into a spherical formula, and the same spherical Mercator measured the same way reproduces sec φ exactly.

The scale of a screen map is not one number

A zoom level prints one scale for the whole world, and the map is at that scale along exactly one line. At 60° north the picture labelled 1:136,495 is a 1:68,765 map — and the factor is not quite sec φ either, because the projection puts a geodetic latitude into a spherical formula.

applied · Screen A 1,000 km bar on Mercator, drawn at 0° and read elsewhere. The same length of paper, carried up the map. Each pair of bars is the ground distance that length actually spans at that latitude — the filled bar along the parallel, the outline along the meridian. At 75° the reading along the parallel is 259 km against the 1,000 the bar claims, an error of 74 per cent. The two readings agree everywhere, because Mercator is conformal — so one number per latitude corrects any measurement taken off it.

A scale bar is right in one place

The bar in the corner of a world map is a picture of a distance, and it is a true picture along one line. On Mercator it reads 500 kilometres for a thousand at 60° north — and on an equal-area map it reads 500 one way and 2,000 the other, so the projection recommended for measuring is the one on which no single correction exists.

applied · Screen The least distortion possible over a 20° region. Scale factor along a radius of the cap, each projection normalised to unit scale at the centre. Chebyshev's criterion names the projection whose scale is constant on the boundary as the conformal map of least scale variation, and for a cap that is the stereographic projection centred on it — reaching exactly sec²(ρ/2) = 1.0311 at the rim, marked. Every other conformal projection drawn here rises past that line before it gets there. This is the only figure on the site showing an optimum rather than a comparison.

Scale distortion is the third failure

A map's stated scale is its scale at one place. Everywhere else it differs, by a factor that no conformal projection can avoid and that neither of the two usual distortion measures reports. It is the failure everybody uses and nobody counts.

distortion · Tissot Sheets for a tolerance, from Chebyshev's bound and a covering. For each stated tolerance on the scale error, the cap radius at which the best possible conformal projection just meets it — sec²(ρ/2) − 1 = tolerance, which is Chebyshev's bound and has no fitting in it — and then the number of such caps needed to cover the sphere at the packing density a real arrangement achieves. One part in a thousand costs 1210 sheets of 403 kilometres radius. The slope is -0.989: a factor of ten in what the job will accept is a factor of ten in the atlas.

How many sheets an atlas needs

A tolerance on the scale error inverts, through Chebyshev's bound, into a sheet radius — and a covering problem turns the radius into a count. One part in a thousand costs 1,210 sheets of 403 kilometres radius, the count goes as the reciprocal of the tolerance exactly, and the projection multiplies it by anything from one to fifty-six.

choosing · Choosing Four steps between a tape and a drawing. A slope distance of 76.895 km measured at 3.2° on ground 220 m above sea level, reduced to the British National Grid, with every step drawn on a logarithmic scale in millimetres. The slope reduction is the largest by a wide margin at 119.90 m and is the one everybody applies. The grid reduction is 30.23 m. The fourth bar is not a step at all: it is what using the levelled height where the height above the ellipsoid is wanted costs, with a geoid separation of 48.5 m — 583 mm, which is 1.9% of the grid reduction it sits beside and 29 times the tolerance the job closes to. Reading a correction's importance off its share of the chain is how it gets dropped.

What a tape measures

Four steps stand between an instrument reading and a coordinate, and their sizes are not in the order anybody expects. On a 77-kilometre line the slope reduction is 120 metres, the grid reduction 30, and a step nobody names — using the height above sea level where the height above the ellipsoid is wanted — is 583 millimetres.

practice · Reduction The two reductions, at a grid factor of 1.0004. A measurement made on the ground has to be brought to the ellipsoid and then to the grid, and the two corrections have opposite signs. The elevation factor is R/(R+h) and always shrinks; the grid factor here is 1.0004, which stretches. Their product is the only number a surveyor can use. They cancel exactly at 2551 metres. At 1500 metres the combined factor is 165 parts per million, which is 1.65 metres on a 10 kilometre baseline.

The ground is not the grid

A tape measure on a hillside has to be brought down to the ellipsoid and then out onto the map, and the two corrections have opposite signs. On a grid whose scale factor exceeds one there is exactly one elevation where they cancel — 2,551 metres, for a factor of 1.0004.

datums · Height Everywhere Albers is exactly right, and the band round it. The set on which both principal scale factors are one — the only ground where a ruler on this map, at the map's own stated scale, measures the true distance in every direction. It is the parallels at 20.000° and 60.000°, drawn as a curve, with the band within 0.01 of true scale shaded round it. That band is 2.673 per cent of the sphere, and it narrows as ε as the tolerance tightens. The curve at its centre has no width at all, and no tolerance makes it have one.

The places where a map is exactly right

Nine essays on this ladder say a map cannot be right everywhere. None asks where it IS right — and the answer is a curve, a pair of curves, or two isolated places, never a patch. Measured across fourteen projections the set's neighbourhood shrinks with an exponent of 0.48, 1.0 or 2.0, and the value the impossibility forbids is 0.

impossibility · Curvature The scale asked for and the scale the pyramid has, at 0°. A tiling scheme exists only at integer zoom levels, a factor of two apart in resolution, so a request for any scale between them is answered by the nearest rung. The ratio runs from 0.707 to 1.405 — 1/√2 to √2 — and repeats identically at every doubling, which is four times that in area. A request for 1:10,000 is served at zoom 16, which is 1:8,531; A request for 1:25,000 is served at zoom 14, which is 1:34,124; A request for 1:50,000 is served at zoom 13, which is 1:68,247. Nothing anywhere reports it, because the map that arrives is a perfectly good map of something.

Zoom is a ladder

A tiling scheme exists only at integer zoom levels a factor of two apart, so a request for 1:25,000 is answered with 1:34,124 — 36 per cent coarser, and 86 per cent coarser in area. The mismatch runs from 1/√2 to √2 and repeats identically at every doubling, and nothing anywhere reports it, because the map that arrives is a perfectly good map of something.

applied · Screen How thinly a sphere can be covered by a few equal caps. The covering density of the best arrangement of n equal caps found for each n — the total area of the caps divided by the sphere's, so a value of one would be a perfect tiling with no overlap. The horizontal line is 2π/√27 = 1.2092, the thinnest covering density of the PLANE by equal discs, which this site has used for the sphere since its first atlas essay. It is wrong in both directions: at 2 caps the sphere is covered more thinly than any plane can be, because a cap may be a hemisphere, and at every count from 3 upwards more thickly — 1.5092 at 3, and 1.3377 at 14. The ringed points are the four counts whose optimum is proved: 2 at 90.00°, 4 at 70.53°, 6 at 54.74°, 12 at 37.38°. Everything else is an upper bound from a search, drawn as one, and the bound loosens as the count rises — the search reaches the proved optimum to 3.4 per cent at these counts and has no such check anywhere else.

The sphere is not the plane at small counts

The site's atlas arithmetic multiplies an ideal sheet count by 2π/√27, the thinnest covering density of the plane. At the four counts whose optimal covering of the sphere is a theorem the plane's number is 21 per cent high at two caps and 9, 5 and 2 per cent low at four, six and twelve — wrong in both directions, and the direction changes with the count.

choosing · Choosing Three selection rules, and what each one keeps. Keeping one feature in ten from a stated population whose size distribution has a Pareto exponent of a half — the exponent Töpfer's law is a theorem about. Keeping the largest carries 99.99 per cent of the total size and inflates the median feature by a factor of 95. A random sample keeps the median to 1.068 and carries 5.0 per cent of the total. The two rules are right about different things and there is no rule that is right about both, because the total lives in the tail and the median does not.

Which features survive is not a sample

The rung below answers how many features a scale can carry and treats the population as a number. Which ones survive is a different question: keeping one feature in ten carries 99.99 per cent of the total length and inflates the median feature by a factor of 95, and the shape of the size distribution survives both exactly.

applied · Generalise The same totals, drawn as symbols, on two pages. A band field, largest in the mid latitudes carried by each region and drawn as a circle whose area is proportional to the total. Every symbol is right: a total is a total wherever it is drawn, and the two maps carry identical numbers. What differs is the ground under each symbol. On Mercator the symbol at 60° sits on a region drawn 4.0 times larger than it would be on an equal-area sheet, so the density a reader forms — symbol against region — is out by that factor.

A symbol has a size on the page and an area on the ground

A proportional symbol is right as a total wherever it is drawn — a count is a count. Read against the region beneath it, which is how a reader forms a density, it is wrong by exactly the reciprocal of the areal factor: 0.083 at 73° north on Mercator, a factor of twelve, with the correction available as one multiplication that no atlas makes.

distortion · Thematic

Named alongside it

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

Scale factorToleranceNominal scalePrincipal scale factorsVerificationAngular deformationClosed formConformalityPurposeSpherical capChebyshev's boundCombined factor

All concepts