Post

I'm not sure I'm getting the current hype for using superelliptical curves or "smooth corners" in transit map design. They seem like an awful lot of work for an incredibly small improvement that most average people wouldn't even notice to me. Interested to hear the thoughts of other on this.

I'm currently running my experiments in Illustrator with a script that approximates smooth curves (because Illustrator can't make them natively) and I am not convinced they're an improvement. Yes, the curves may be smoother to the eye, but getting parallel paths to look good is very problematic.

Here's some samples. In the top row, I applied three presets in the script to the curve: you can see where the paths now overlap or leave a gap between them. UGLY. In the bottom row, I applied the script to the middle path, and then offset the other two paths from it. Better but cheating?

And here's a version with a bit of white space between the parallel paths – the top row introduces all sorts of "wobbliness" because the gaps are not consistent. The offset bottom row looks better overall to my eye, but enough to justify the extra work involved? I'm not sure.

Lastly, here's a comparison between the three superellipse presets (solid magenta) and a standard curve (dotted cyan). The default preset, which produced the most pleasing result in my tests, actually sits entirely inside the standard curve, but probably looks optically correct because of that.

What script are you using? It'd be fun to try this out on some of our map geometries to see how it feels.

There's a link to it near the bottom of this article, which gives a good overview of the concept as a whole. medium.com/design-bootc...