My understanding of your project is that it maps transportation/travel data to give a sense of the network connections around Auckland. In the final piece I am not sure exactly what data is mapped, different types of transportation certainly, but are you mapping all Aucklanders travel, or the possible connections provided by bus, train and ferry routes? Is it limited to public transport or is walking, cycling and driving included? Is it over a fixed period of time, and if so, how long? I saw that earlier you talked about gather data from three people over a week, is this what is presented in the final mappings and if so, is that enough data to be able to draw wider conclusions about Auckland in general? Why not just reproduce the existing bus and train maps?
I think given that it is a relatively conventional data set you investigated, you might have needed to employ a better strategy to collect data, surely this information is already available from city council transport planning people?
A lot of these questions probably have answers which are obvious to you, but it is important to think how someone unfamiliar with your project can engage in your work. In a public exhibition its worth assuming that the audience isn't familiar with your working process. Simple things like a key decoding what each colour thread represents would help.
Graphically, and I guess, conceptually I have to question the way in which you have worked with the grid. The quote you found early on is interesting but I think you need to be careful in how that informs your work. The grid in mapping is a conceptual device, which is abstract and assumed to have zero thickness, in your mapping it becomes hugely thick (in relation to the city) and this distorts and fragments our reading of the city.
Given that you don't make a case for the significance of the limited data set you gathered, I think this project needed to push a lot further to offer a new way of understanding what is a perennial issue in Auckland.
1 comment:
Hi Claire,
My understanding of your project is that it maps transportation/travel data to give a sense of the network connections around Auckland. In the final piece I am not sure exactly what data is mapped, different types of transportation certainly, but are you mapping all Aucklanders travel, or the possible connections provided by bus, train and ferry routes? Is it limited to public transport or is walking, cycling and driving included? Is it over a fixed period of time, and if so, how long? I saw that earlier you talked about gather data from three people over a week, is this what is presented in the final mappings and if so, is that enough data to be able to draw wider conclusions about Auckland in general? Why not just reproduce the existing bus and train maps?
I think given that it is a relatively conventional data set you investigated, you might have needed to employ a better strategy to collect data, surely this information is already available from city council transport planning people?
A lot of these questions probably have answers which are obvious to you, but it is important to think how someone unfamiliar with your project can engage in your work. In a public exhibition its worth assuming that the audience isn't familiar with your working process. Simple things like a key decoding what each colour thread represents would help.
Graphically, and I guess, conceptually I have to question the way in which you have worked with the grid. The quote you found early on is interesting but I think you need to be careful in how that informs your work. The grid in mapping is a conceptual device, which is abstract and assumed to have zero thickness, in your mapping it becomes hugely thick (in relation to the city) and this distorts and fragments our reading of the city.
Given that you don't make a case for the significance of the limited data set you gathered, I think this project needed to push a lot further to offer a new way of understanding what is a perennial issue in Auckland.
chris
Post a Comment