Lab Assignment #4: Learning ArcGIS

Map for Exercise #1

Map for Exercise #2/5

Graph for Exercise #2

Map for Exercise #3

Map for Exercise #4

Map for Exercise #5

Final Product: Series of Maps related to an Airport Expansion Proposal

Review of ArcGIS: Potential and Pitfalls

After completing the formal tutorial of ArcGIS I have realized the great potential that this program has to transform data and all kinds of information into a visually appealing image. This transformation follows the old saying that “a picture is worth a thousand words” except in this case, a map is worth a thousand data cells. Although the interface of the program is not incredibly sleek or attractive, ArcGIS still gives you the opportunity to create eye-catching visuals with seemingly limitless options for customization. Through the course of the tutorial I was led to create three maps, a graph, and an extent rectangle. However, in the final exercise I was able to make my own choices about color, borders, map elements, and other basic customizations. Through this process of learning all about ArcGIS, I realized how little I know about ArcGIS, but I am more than willing to continue exploring.

In several of the assigned readings concerning neogeography, ArcGIS is often put into the same category as tools like Google Maps which facilitate amateur map-making based on an individual’s experiences. However after completing Lab Assignment #3 which focused on Google Maps and its capabilities, it seems inaccurate to put the two programs into the same category. ArcGIS is more often based on data from the census and other governmental statistics, while Google Maps is usually used as a tool to communicate personal experiences through pictures, videos, and landmarks. From my experience with these programs, ArcGIS seems to be a more scientific approach to mapping than Google Maps. Furthermore, I had much fewer glitches and problems with ArcGIS than I had with Google Maps. With elements like multi-layers, table of contents, legends, and customization, ArcGIS was more useful and reliable than web based programs like Google Maps.

Part of the distinction between ArcGIS and other neogeographic programs is that ArcGIS is more scientific in its analysis of data. Instead of representing sensory data, like pictures and details about experiences, ArcGIS often displays statistical and physical data. Since it is more detailed and complex this program is inherently less intuitive and easy-to-use, which is why the tutorial is necessary. Even after completing the tutorial, I know that I still of much to learn about ArcGIS and all of the tools that were left undiscovered in the tutorial. Also, ArcGIS seems somewhat less creative and user-friendly compared to Google Maps, which allows you to post pictures and videos to significantly enhance observers’ experiences of your map with little to no formal experience.

Another major pitfall of ArcGIS is that there is only one distributor and developer of GIS software, ESRI. This significantly limits the innovation and enhancement of the program because there is no competition to drive improvements. Furthermore, this monopoly has made the price of this program much too high for casual users. The program is only offered to students because of connections with a sponsoring university. Other neogeography programs are more widespread with more users due to the low cost, easy-access, user-friendliness, and the informal, fun uses and purposes.

In conclusion, ArcGIS is a sophisticated program with enormous potential to visualize complex data in order to communicate spatial patterns and trends. However, due to its scientific nature and privatization, ArcGIS is not user-friendly or easily accessible to the average person. I believe that eventually many of its weaknesses will be overcome and ArcGIS will continue to expand its potential to effectively display data.