The first Tufte chapter made sense to me, but there were some points I do not agree with. There were points throughout the chapter were Tufte spoke in absolutes, and I am not sure there is an equation for mapping images. While I do concede there are certain types of images where mapping becoming extremely important (scientific images immediately come to mind) I feel like there is more need for indirect mapping.
I feel like strategically placed text that is not as direct is used all the time. Tufte touched on “Minimal Mapping”. I feel like every day images use this all the time. A lot of advertisements or everyday images use minimal mapping to give context or deeper meaning. We as an audience would probably understand the advertisement, but the small text that doesn’t even convey meaning, conveys more context, and allows up to come up with a deeper understanding.
As I read this chapter, I was reminded consistently of drawings kindergarteners create. They work diligently, violently scribbling with crayons, but at the end of their work feel the need to label everything. While I understand that this example is a stretch, its does imitate Tufte’s point that the purpose of mapping to to explain the meaning, and present the thoughts the artist or image is trying to make. We might not be able to make much of a toddler’s refrigerator quality artwork, if it weren’t for their mapping.