Detailed Presi maps

[Cartophile]

In cartographic printing, and, for that matter, with books, there are no canonical definitions distinguishing an 'edition' from a 'printing' and even from a 'state'. All the same, and speaking generally, one expects editions to be significantly different from each other, in format or content. Two otherwise identical issues of a map that differ only in, say, a shade of green, would be regarded by most collectors or specialists as just different printings (or, especially if from the same year) different states, and not different editions. Even if, say, the spellings of two placenames were corrected in the later issue, that might still be regarded as a second printing, not really a new edition (but we could agree to disagree about that). All three versions of the Washburn Mt Washington map were issued in a span of two or three years (again, I'm not going to the effort of pulling out all my copies, but my 2nd is 1988, and 3rd is 1989), a length of time not very conducive to massive revisions. My guess--and it's only that--is that the AMC or the Swiss printer said to Brad Washburn something like, 'We've sold nearly every copy; we need to print a new edition', and he replied, 'Go ahead', without fussing over whether the word 'edition' or 'printing' would appear. Yes, he almost certainly knew the difference.

But again, I haven't spend time going over every square inch of the maps, and if someone else wants to spend the time doing so, I'd indeed be very interested in hearing whether there are actual differences among the three printings in the topography shown, or in the names applied to the features.

In contrast to this map, we use the word peculiarly when talking about Franklin Leavitt's maps. We usually refer to those as 'editions', but in fact, with only two exceptions, each of his maps is *entirely* different from the others, the only commonality being that they represent the White Mountains. So, for those maps, even 'editions' (implying that they're variations on the same thing) is probably not the right word.

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

In cartographic printing, and, for that matter, with books, there are no canonical definitions distinguishing an 'edition' from a 'printing' and even from a 'state'. All the same, and speaking generally, one expects editions to be significantly different from each other, in format or content. Two otherwise identical issues of a map that differ only in, say, a shade of green, would be regarded by most collectors or specialists as just different printings (or, especially if from the same year) different states, and not different editions. Even if, say, the spellings of two placenames were corrected in the later issue, that might still be regarded as a second printing, not really a new edition (but we could agree to disagree about that). All three versions of the Washburn Mt Washington map were issued in a span of two or three years (again, I'm not going to the effort of pulling out all my copies, but my 2nd is 1988, and 3rd is 1989), a length of time not very conducive to massive revisions. My guess--and it's only that--is that the AMC or the Swiss printer said to Brad Washburn something like, 'We've sold nearly every copy; we need to print a new edition', and he replied, 'Go ahead', without fussing over whether the word 'edition' or 'printing' would appear. Yes, he almost certainly knew the difference.

But again, I haven't spend time going over every square inch of the maps, and if someone else wants to spend the time doing so, I'd indeed be very interested in hearing whether there are actual differences among the three printings in the topography shown, or in the names applied to the features.

In contrast to this map, we use the word peculiarly when talking about Franklin Leavitt's maps. We usually refer to those as 'editions', but in fact, with only two exceptions, each of his maps is *entirely* different from the others, the only commonality being that they represent the White Mountains. So, for those maps, even 'editions' (implying that they're variations on the same thing) is probably not the right word.

Nice detailed reply, but Brad had the different versions of his Mount Washington map labeled editions, which is all that matters.

 

[evilhanz]

Another map that came out of Brad's work was a 1:5000 scale highlight of Pinkham Notch included with a 1991 hiking guide. It's not as desirable as the Mount Washington map, but there are probably far fewer copies floating around.