Archive for the ‘Infographics’ Category
First: one about the companies that made the kits worn by teams in the World Cup.
Second: an entirely untimely one about the Premier League relegation battle on the last day of the 2010-11 season.
Not an infographic, rather an animation that uses data.
Basically, since the 1958-59 season, English football has had four top tiers. Prior to that, there were the first two divisions and two third divisions: a north division, and a south division. Since that season, of the 92 teams in those four divisions, between 11 and 14 of them have always been London-based teams.
This animation uses the places of those teams within the four tiers and the colours of those teams to create an animation. The longer a team is in a specific division, the closer to the edge of the circle that team is.
More Mexico City stuff here. When I say “more,” I mean one-other-thing-that-I-did-last-year-but-I-intend-to-actually-do-a-lot-more-of-this-stuff.
A couple of infographics today. First, one looking at the time travelling done by Bill and Ted in their Excellent Adventure. And the other one is only really of interest to me and my ego. It looks at the results of searching my name in Google Images. There are more famous Craig Robinsons than me.
I made a chart about the season that ended a short while ago. It looks at the title race, relegation and how ace Suárez and Sturridge were. As a Liverpool fan, it was the most enjoyable season in quite some time. Didn’t end quite the way one would have hoped, but, damn, it was fun.
Full chart here: http://flipflopflyin.com/flipflopflyball/other-pl1314.html
I made a chart about Prince’s magnificent 1987 album. Here.
Before the start of game three of the World Series, Fox Sports showed this map to their viewers. It is awful. Let me tell you why.
(A caveat: While I have ended up doing a lot of infographics, I’m an illustrator/artist, and not a data visualisation expert, so my opinions do not and should not have the weight of people like Edward Tufte.)
We live in an age where, just like love, bad infographics are all around. I have made bad infographics in my life. Plenty of them. I like to think, though, that when I look back at those bad graphics, I learn from the mistakes I made. To that end, let’s look at some mistakes in the Fox Sports map.
We can start by putting our fingers in our mouths to mime vomiting at the aesthetic of Fox’s on-screen graphics. All the shiny stuff that is way more appropriate for Robot Wars than baseball. Add in blurry bits of orange and white in the background, and lay it all over a blimp shot of St. Louis.
Maps should be easy to read, especially if they are going to be on screen for fewer than 15 seconds, as this map was. Your eyes and brain have to read and understand which categories of data are being shown and then process those categories when looking at the map. The way this map has been laid out makes that difficult.
Firstly, the colours they have chosen to represent each team. One of the teams has “red” in the name. Which colour is that team assigned on the map? Blue. With so much to take in in a short space of time, that one should have been a no-brainer, and they got it wrong. Of course, both teams have red as their main colour (and cardinal is a shade of red, I guess), which does make it more difficult, but, in my opinion, the team with the name of the colour in their name gets first dibs on that colour.
Fox is showing us four kinds of states here: heavily in favour of either team, or slightly in favour of either team. That’s fine. I’m all for less black and white and more grey in data analysis in general. But does the key to understanding this information really need to take up a third of the screen?
And that giant key is so difficult to read. For one thing, the key area is dominated by the chopped team logos on black backgrounds. (This is a bug of mine with a lot of sports broadcasts: designing their on-screen graphics with no regard to keeping the logos intact. Here, we can see the middle half of the Red Sox’s cap insignia, which at a glance looks like a badly-drawn H. Note that TV networks never do that with their own logos.) Those logos add nothing to our understanding. They are visual junk. And they also create an overpowering amount of white in the area we are supposed to be able to quickly read and understand. Squint your eyes (or just take your specs off, nerds) and you’ll see that the most noticeable part of that key is a whole load of white.
The relevant information in that third of the screen should be the colours used on the map and what they represent. But the colours that they’ve used on the map are shown on the bracket-y end bits of their Terminator-ish graphics. Those end brackets contain the most important information for understanding the map, yet they are almost invisible.
Look closely at those faux-shiny brackets: they’re not even the same shades as those used on the map. This graphic used blues and reds that are too close to each other. It’s difficult to differentiate between “leaning” and “heavily,” even if you did manage to figure out that the brackets on the partial-logo cartouches are the whole key to the map.
One last thing: The Red Sox’s home city and state and region is, as we all know, in the north east of the United States. The whole map is tilted away from us. Massachusetts and the rest of New England are already small states, in terms of land area, compared to the states in the west of the country. In fact, both of the teams’ home states are in the half of the map tilted furthest from us. If Fox Sports absolutely must tilt the map, it would’ve been preferable to flip the elements of the graphic, so the map could be titled with the east coast closest to us. This is if and only if you insist on tilting the map at all.
The failures of this map irked me so much that I spent almost ten whole minutes on remaking it. Imagine this quick Tumblr post as me showing you the plans of a house. I’ve not put the sofas, carpets and curtains in. Despite the knocked-off-in-ten-minutes-ness of this, I think it’s already a heck of a lot easier to read.
Whether you like my choices of colour, or my somewhat tedious tendency to always use Gill Sans, or the flatness that banishes all reflections and light source tomfoolery, I think it’s a lot clearer. I have made the map flat so that New England is a lot easier to see. Because we read left to right, the key is on the left so it’s the first thing we look at. There’s space at the top left where you could place the words “World Series,” “Fox Sports,” and “Facebook Fandom Map.”
Because of our familiarity with temperature gauges going from hot to cold, or map topography colours on regular maps, I’ve re-ordered the key from being most pro-Cardinals to least pro-Cardinals (that is, most pro-Red Sox), rather than Fox’s heavily-leaning-heavily-leaning ordering. Our brains are impressive things, and we pick up how to read graphics over the years. It’s only when people do things that confound our knowledge that data visualisation gets confusing. I mean, how else would we know that the Cardinals are popular in the Midwest?
I’ve been keeping a chart of my sleep for seven years:
Click here to see it full-size.
The Pittsburgh Pirates won last night. Their 81st win of the season. The first time they have won 81 games since, like, forever. Here’s a big chart.
Baseball! ¡Béisbol! Current leagues and teams in Mexico. Ligas y equipos actuales en México.
Thought you might like to see how infographics begin; before they get all neat and tidy. This is one I’m working on, a Venn diagram of the overlap of bands that you get from Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young. This is just the basic layout. There’ll be a lot more bands eventually.
For quite a while, there’s been this thing in the back of my brain. I like looking at complicated road interchanges. The most obvious examples of which (mostly because there are photos on Wikipedia) are the Gravelly Hill Interchange in Brimingham, England and the Tom Moreland Interchange near Atlanta, Georgia. Here’s photos of those interchanges, taken from Wikipedia:
The thing I have in my head is trying to imagine such an interchange with four roads where one could drive and change direction to each of the cardinal and ordinal directions of the other roads; that is, if you are on a road travelling north, you could change directing and go northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, and northwest.
Why is this interesting? I dunno, it’s just something I’ve been thinking about. But it’s a fine example of why I feel the need to do infographics and organise information. What goes on inside my brain is a big fucking mess. It’s a rubbish dump. And this specific thought, about creating an image of these interchanges demonstrates that brain junk quite well.
Last night, I was messing about with the Paper app on my iPad, drawing each of the off-ramps that would be needed to change to every direction. This is what that looks like:
When I finished drawing that, I was kinda happy, but knew that it’d make more sense if I tidied it up in Photoshop. So that’s what I did this morning. But in the process of drawing it neatly (making sure each road was straight, the same width, had a different shade to denote the height off the ground, and had a border that would aid seeing where the roads overlap or meet), I noticed that I’d been thinking about it in a way too complicated way. The solution for the cardinal and ordinal junction was ridiculously simple: a big roundabout:
Normally, when I do an infographic, it’s the topic that interests me, and I want that information to be clear so I can understand it better. But doing this interchange, it’s shown me that taking something out of my brain is cathartic; it untangles the cables behind the back of the TV. And understanding things—sometimes things that don’t actually matter—is very pleasant for my brain.
Infographic regarding that horrible Crash Test Dummies song.
Here’s a chart regarding the first four Frankie Goes To Hollywood singles.
The Fall have had a lot of members. I’ve attempted to do a chart about them.