Quote Originally Posted by JoshStolarz View Post
When it's at that scale I tend to draw clusters of forests rather than individual trees. While it can work, I think you're distorting the true scale so much that it's confusing to say an individual tree actually represents 50 trees. But, that may just be me.

- Josh
Yeah and just to be clear, I was saying 50 trees could represent a forest (of many more trees), leaving a single tree as representing....who knows? Not necessarily 50 trees. Not 1 tree. Not a forest. So when you have your 50-tree forest, I think that makes sense visually and people think 'got it...it's a forest, could be 500 trees, could be 50,000, but whatever, it's clearly a forest'. But when you do that and then have a single tree somewhere, then it's not as clear what this tree means. In fact in that case I think it starts being less 'representative' and more....either artistic or realistic, depending on the other elements. But certainly more confusing if someone is trying to interpret it. And then you're back to 'well, what is the purpose of the map?'.