If you’re ever stuck for an idea to blog (although I don’t think that’s very likely), perhaps you could start a series called something like, “Top 10 worst visualization pet peeves”.

Formal education in GIS doesn’t dwell on the aesthetic and perceptual properties of mapping (at least it didn’t in my day), so I’m sure many readers would find a series like this to be very useful.

One of the places where it is misleading is in one of those geological cross sections. Saw one in a geology text book showing a section across Yellowstone and it was obvious that the caldera rim was not as high in relation to the rest of the terrain as was shown.

Anyway, thank you again for the blog!

Yup, this mostly applies to “photorealistsc” 3D renders—there are plenty of diagrams that benefit from exaggerated scaling. However, I think it’s important to keep in mind that this can lead to false impressions. One example is diagrams of subduction boundaries, which almost always show a steeply plunging subducting plate, when in reality the angle of descent is shallow.