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

Angular deformation around three standard parallels

Drawn here at the parameters it defaults to, with every essay that calls it.
Angular deformation around three standard parallels. Three equal-area cylindrical projections differing only in where they are exact — standard parallels at equator, 30°, 45°. Each has zero angular deformation at its own standard parallel and grows away from it in both directions. Choosing a standard parallel is choosing which latitudes to treat well, and there is no choice that treats them all well.

Three equal-area cylindrical projections differing only in where they are exact — standard parallels at equator, 30°, 45°. Each has zero angular deformation at its own standard parallel and grows away from it in both directions. Choosing a standard parallel is choosing which latitudes to treat well, and there is no choice that treats them all well.

It is one of 8 figures drawn by the same construction, and the drawing above is this one with nothing changed.

5 essays call it. Every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Changing this changes every one of these figures.

Angular deformation around three standard parallels. Three equal-area cylindrical projections differing only in where they are exact — standard parallels at equator, 30°, 45°. Each has zero angular deformation at its own standard parallel and grows away from it in both directions. Choosing a standard parallel is choosing which latitudes to treat well, and there is no choice that treats them all well. The families

What a standard parallel buys

A standard parallel is a line where the projection is exact. Choosing one does not reduce the distortion — it decides where the distortion is zero and lets everything grow away from it.

 How much each projection inflates a cell, by latitude. Five patches of the sphere, each 20° by 10°, and the factor by which each projection enlarges them relative to the equatorial one. An equal-area projection sits flat on 1. Mercator reaches 15.4× at 70°, which is the mechanism behind every complaint about the size of Greenland. What is taught wrongly

Mercator against Peters

The most-argued question in cartography, conducted almost entirely without anyone measuring anything. Both projections are exactly what they claim, each destroys what the other keeps, and the numbers are computable in either direction.

 Every projection in the library, measured against both properties. Maximum angular deformation across the bottom, maximum areal error up the side, both on logarithmic scales and both measured over several hundred sample points rather than taken from the projection's description. Conformal projections lie on the left edge, equal-area ones along the bottom, and the corner where both vanish is empty because a projection there would be an isometry of the sphere onto the plane. All 26 are plotted; the five named here are Mercator, Stereographic, Gall–Peters, Mollweide, Winkel tripel. The impossibility

The trade-off is two lines

Conformal means the two principal scales are equal. Equal-area means their product is one. Both at once forces both to one, which is an isometry, which the curvature forbids. That is the entire argument.

 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. It shows an optimum rather than a comparison. Measuring distortion

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.

 The half-extent at which each rival stops fitting a Gall–Peters graticule. For each candidate, the size of region at which its best fit to a Gall–Peters map first leaves a residual of a fifth of a per cent of the map's width. Below that size the two are the same picture. The numbers are half-extents in degrees of latitude, at 20° north, with the plane affine transformation removed; a bar at 90° is a rival that never separates at all within the range searched. What is taught wrongly

What a careless copy hides

A photocopier that stretches one axis is a nuisance to remove before a projection can be identified. Removing it costs more than it looks: an affine fit absorbs the entire difference between the cylindrical equal-area projections, so Gall-Peters and Behrmann become the same picture at any size, to sixteen decimal places.

The whole library