PDA

View Full Version : Vertical exaggeration in cave maps.



Thurlor
04-14-2011, 01:48 AM
Hello all.

I'm in the process of working on some maps of a world spanning cave network and I've come across an issue with scaling. Any lateral (cut away) map showing the caves on a planetary scale cannot show depth in any meaningful way. Is it considered okay in such maps to use 'vertical exaggeration'? In other words, can I use a different scale for up/down compared to east/west? I'm thinking of something along the lines of 1px = 10km (east/west) and 1px = 10m (up/down) for large scale maps and only going to a 1:1 ratio for small scale maps.

Thanks in advance for any help.

krasimir
04-14-2011, 07:50 AM
Can you post an image illustrating this? Frankly, when I read about how something looks, I can never properly visualize it in my head.

DevinNight
04-14-2011, 08:43 AM
I think shading things is another good way to show depth, the higher levels are lighter and the lower levels are darker.

Thurlor
04-14-2011, 08:43 AM
This is a very rough concept sketch, and even with vertical exaggeration there is scaling issues, but it gets the idea across I think. It represents 40,000km from east to west (circumference of the world) and 20km depth.

35098

I feel I should point out that this is all aimed at creating a map for the current challenge.

RobA
04-14-2011, 04:02 PM
This is a very rough concept sketch, and even with vertical exaggeration there is scaling issues, but it gets the idea across I think. It represents 40,000km from east to west (circumference of the world) and 20km depth.

35098

I feel I should point out that this is all aimed at creating a map for the current challenge.

That works for me! Even is things like Google earth they provide a vertical scale parameter so you can exaggerate verticality and better appreciate elevation changes.

-Rob A>

anstett
04-14-2011, 05:47 PM
I think that the 2:1 ratio works well, just be sure to keep the elevations of mountains, etc. to the same scale as those caverns down below.

BOB

RobA
04-14-2011, 07:20 PM
I think that the 2:1 ratio works well, just be sure to keep the elevations of mountains, etc. to the same scale as those caverns down below.

BOB


That's 2,000:1

-Rob A>

Thurlor
04-15-2011, 07:52 AM
That's 2,000:1

-Rob A>

Actually, it's 1000:1

anstett
04-16-2011, 12:35 PM
Chuckles so math is not a strong point. As long as it is consistent.

BOB

RobA
04-16-2011, 04:20 PM
Actually, it's 1000:1

Doh! I was using the image dimension, not the map scale! :blush:

-Rob A>