3 ms·
I prefer the (related) Dymaxion approach myself, but I'll admit it's not quite as accessible.
by alanbernstein 5y ago
I prefer the (related) Dymaxion approach myself, but I'll admit it's not quite as accessible.
- birktj 5y agoI really like the Dymaxion projection as well, especially the fact that one can easily see that all major land masses are separated by only small distances of water. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map
- zokier 5y agoDymaxion map is neat, but I don't think human brains are very good at handling interrupted maps and Dymaxion is particularly challenging. It is just pretty difficult to mentally intuit how the edges connect, and especially judge distances that cross the edges. Trying to eyeball something like Sydney-Lima great circle path on Dymaxion is unintuitive. Of similar interrupted style, I think butterfly projections are even better. They might distort land masses slightly more, but are immensely more readable. And they have very pretty symmetric outline.
- afterburner 5y agoEven better, a close relative of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahill%E2%80%93Keyes_projection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahill%E2%80%93Keyes_projectio...