Visual information is often about comparison. Comparing levels of a graph. Comparing distances on a map. Comparing colours on a heat map.
We see by comparing one piece of stimuli with another to decide what is in front, behind, moving.
I recently found a book I used to have when I was young. It is called Comparisons and is by The Diagram Group. It uses different methods to compare different things, weights, people, buildings, units.
I have photographed some of the spreads for discussion here.
The first set are what I would call Scaled Comparisons. They ask you compare two visual properties drawn to scale on the page.
They may be objects that are not typically associated with one another - but they only require us to understand one in order to reflect on the other.
It helps if the one that we start with is familiar to us. A man, a cat, a pen, something we know and can use as a measuring device.
The above spread uses Central Park, NYC, to show the distances runners cover - a nice idea if every one was familiar with central park - although the park/joggers association is nice
World Rivers stretched across the US works - even more striking is the juxtaposition of the Nile across Europe, below
It is a shame that the vehicles are not to scale with the people that fit in them - the London Taxi may be - but the planes and boats aren't - the graphic is torn in two ways - showing capacity of passengers and scale of vehicles - I think both are interesting and both would be possible (just don't show the whole boat?)
Life-size scale illustrations have a visceral power and accessibility - the ruler is a sound touch to remind us of this. Maybe bringing in a domestic or schoolroom tool such as a ruler, these 'escaped' insects seem even scarier - the object that you are comparing it to can bring an emotional meaning as well as a quantitative scale - it's why lazy journalism that compares everything with buses or elephants seems glib - people don't just compare the scale - they look for an association between the meaning of compared objects
The next set are what I would call Stepped Comparisons. They ask the reader to understand one concept of measurement and then apply it, often in many steps to the concept. It is a lot harder to get these to work. I imagine that many people can understand the scaling of a matchbox to a box of cereal, then to a car, a room, to a house and possibly to a street, but when the steps are too many or leave the realm of the known, then people can get lost.
This discusses distance - not unlike The Powers of Ten. I think the Powers of Ten film is more impressive for two things - animation smooths the stepping of scales and the voice-over that keeps us paying attention and referencing previous steps.
This spread and many of the stepped ones lose me after a few steps.
This one looks at volumes, again, starting slow, we are ok, but soon lose our way. I wonder if the latter steps, dealing with the larger quantities need to retain some of the visual cues and reminders of the smaller state/ known quantities
This last one deals with historical events - I am not such a fan of this - i think the spiral is an interesting motif - but unrelated events can be associated by proximity as they pass each other on the spiral. It does of course make a time-line easier to fit into a book, but we are in the business of explanation, not fitting things in.
I would argue that many designers duck this responsibility to explain comparative amounts.
It is why there are so many duff credit crunch graphics - we cannot imagine the numbers - and we are not being given any decent ways to visualise them.
I think that each comparison of large numbers should start with something known as the basic unit and move in enough followable steps to the actual amount. Towards the larger steps, aspects of the known, smaller quantities need to be referred back to for orientation in these new harder-to-fathom amounts.
It's a challenge. I'll be writing more on this.
