When did RMN jump the shark?

[Bickendan]

Seems to me that RMN used to be a decent mapmaker, putting out quality atlases and maps.
Something happened along the way, and their maps just aren't on par with what they used to be. What caused this and when did this happen?

For example, when RMN bought out Thomas Bros, the Thomas Guide began a death spiral as RMN's symbology edged in. The last edition -- three years ago! -- of the Portland and Seattle Thomas Guides reverted to Thomas Bros, though the highway shields and fonts remain RMN.

[SSOWorld]

I think when they started releasing atlas for the following year 5 months after the new year of the previous year

[froggie]

Nature of the beast, and that beast is dying.  It was mentioned in another thread that paper map usage is *WAY DOWN* over recent years.  The argument is probably being made about why bothering putting resources and effort into what is effectively a dying (or at best, now a niche) industry?

[agentsteel53]

1926, when they stopped labeling trails in favor of those new-fangled federal routes with the numbers.

(oh Scott N, where are you?)

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

Seems to me that RMN used to be a decent mapmaker, putting out quality atlases and maps.
Something happened along the way, and their maps just aren't on par with what they used to be. What caused this and when did this happen?

RMcN maps (or at least the USA atlases) from as far back as the 1960s tend toward sloppy cartography and loss of detail. It was around that time from all appearances that they began to slip. Gousha maps from the period are far superior IMO.

[flowmotion]

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/view/search?QuickSearchA=QuickSearchA&q=Rand+McNally&sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&search=Search

Looks like they were churning out the crap by the 1930s, if not earlier.

[Scott5114]

I wager that RMcN has probably always been some degree of crap, as others have noted. It is just that now with the Internet we can find out the mistakes more easily, and share them with those who otherwise wouldn't know. (There's an error on the CT map? How would I have known that?)

[bugo]

I don't think they have.  Their cartography is beautiful.  Their only problem is that they have lots of out of date or flat out wrong data.  I don't even mind for the 2013 atlas coming out in early 2012, even though it is silly.  If they would give me 6 weeks to correct errors, their atlas would be great again.

[Scott5114]

Their cartography is beautiful.  Their only problem is that they have lots of out of date or flat out wrong data.

That's jumping the shark. The best cartography can't save bad data. If you take a shitty poem and write it in beautiful, flowing calligraphy it's still a shitty poem.

[bugo]

It's not that the atlas is mostly errors.  I'd say over 99 percent of the maps are correct.  We just notice the errors more than the average person.

[Scott5114]

That's true, but when you run into an error you have to think "what else might be wrong that I don't know about?"

I also have some issues with their cartography choices but that's probably a matter of personal taste.

[empirestate]

It's not that the atlas is mostly errors.  I'd say over 99 percent of the maps are correct.  We just notice the errors more than the average person.

That's true, but we probably also know more about the other options. As a committed Maphead myself, I've looked a lot of road atlases, and RMcN is pretty near the bottom both for accuracy and cartography. By far the most accurate I've seen is the hard-to-find MapArt North America atlas, but it has issues with varying carto style and does some strange things with scale. As an overall product, the National Geographic road atlases, and I own all two editions ever produced, have been my favorite.

[Alps]

That's jumping the shark. The best cartography can't save bad data. If you take a shitty poem and write it in beautiful, flowing calligraphy it's still a shitty poem.

Roses are red, fuck you

[Bickendan]

That's jumping the shark. The best cartography can't save bad data. If you take a shitty poem and write it in beautiful, flowing calligraphy it's still a shitty poem.

Roses are red, fuck you

Wrong font.

[NE2]

As an overall product, the National Geographic road atlases, and I own all two editions ever produced, have been my favorite.

The ones with MapQuest cartography, or did they make their own?

[empirestate]

As an overall product, the National Geographic road atlases, and I own all two editions ever produced, have been my favorite.

The ones with MapQuest cartography, or did they make their own?

MapQuest. You see their carto elsewhere as well, but it never seems to pop quite as well as in the NG.