PDA

View Full Version : Unnamed Commission



arsheesh
07-17-2011, 01:54 PM
A while ago I was approached by a client requesting an alternate version of a map. The client, Silvijanus, had previously requested a map here at the Guild (here's a link (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?12927-Map-for-fantasy-world) to that request), and someone (I think it might have been del337er but I'm not sure) created for him the map you see on the bottom left. Silvijanus liked the map but also wanted to have an alternate version of it in a more photorealistic style; specifically, he wanted the map to resemble the style of my Veskar (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?14541-Veskar-Frozen-Lands-of-the-North&highlight=Veskar) map. The map on the right is a small mock up I did for the client: the final map will be much larger in size (50x70cm). Could be a while before this map is finished. My computer isn't handling the size of the larger map file all that well and progress is slow going.

NOTE: The northern half of the main continent underwent some arcane catastrophe and is now a barren waste land, that's why there is a desert there instead of tundra.

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

tilt
07-17-2011, 02:03 PM
very nice asrsheesh :)

ravells
07-17-2011, 04:25 PM
Looks great. I've never got the hang of making tiny rivers that look good. Yours look great!

Jaxilon
07-17-2011, 04:30 PM
Woohoo! Look forward to seeing this progress arsheesh.

Diamond
07-17-2011, 04:53 PM
Wow. Looks damn cool.

arsheesh
07-17-2011, 07:45 PM
Thanks guys. This is just a small mock-up though, the larger map will likely take quite a bit longer to complete. Oh and Ravs, I have Wilbur to thank for the rivers, I didn't draw those by hand.

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

Steel General
07-19-2011, 04:56 PM
Very nice so far...

arsheesh
07-23-2011, 04:51 PM
Well after maxing out the RAM on my computer I was able to continue work on the large map. The client had requested a map of 50x70cm at 300dpi (that's 8268x5906 px). Well, I ran into a problem in that Wilbur kept crashing. Either the program isn't designed to manipulate a document that size or else my computer lack's sufficient memory to do so. In any event, I had to scale the image down to 35x50cm. I felt like the mountain ranges were a bit too large on the mock up so I decided to scale those down a bit on this map. So here's the result:

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

cantab
07-23-2011, 05:00 PM
The rivers do look a bit strange, but otherwise it's excellent.

Can you not just clip the surrounding sea out when working in Wilbur, allowing more space for land terrain?

Yandor
07-23-2011, 05:12 PM
hahah you've ran into the issue I had with Wilbur. It has issues with larger files, I don't want to say memory leaks but it does take a ton of memory to run wilbur even for smallish images. Thats why I had to do my mountain ranges in chunks for my work here (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?14040-Carian-Round...-Who-knows...-WIP&p=149964&viewfull=1#post149964). But still looks great! keep it up!

waldronate
07-23-2011, 08:46 PM
I recommend the 64-bit Wilbur version for anything much over 4k square.

arsheesh
07-24-2011, 02:00 AM
The rivers do look a bit strange, but otherwise it's excellent.

Can you not just clip the surrounding sea out when working in Wilbur, allowing more space for land terrain?

Hm, would you mind elaborating about the rivers? As far as taking out the sea, you know I hadn't thought of that! Perhaps that might offer a partial solution. Thanks.


hahah you've ran into the issue I had with Wilbur. It has issues with larger files, I don't want to say memory leaks but it does take a ton of memory to run wilbur even for smallish images. Thats why I had to do my mountain ranges in chunks for my work here (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?14040-Carian-Round...-Who-knows...-WIP&p=149964&viewfull=1#post149964). But still looks great! keep it up!

Well glad to know I'm not alone here. Thanks man.


I recommend the 64-bit Wilbur version for anything much over 4k square.

You know I did try downloading the 64-bit version first, but for some reason it didn't work on my system.

Thanks everyone for the comments. The client has just let me know that he prefers the larger mountains I did on the mock up, so I will be redoing this map shortly.

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

cantab
07-24-2011, 08:04 AM
I'm not entirely sure what's 'wrong' with the rivers. (If anything - the appearance may be realistic, and look odd because it's an unfamiliar style). But I think it's that they've rather uniformly and deeply incised into what I'd take as lowland.

Ascension
07-24-2011, 09:42 AM
The only problem I see with the rivers is my main peeve with Wilbur...in the low land the rivers get really straight instead of the big meanders and oxbows you would normally see. Other than that I'd say it looks good.

waldronate
07-24-2011, 05:52 PM
The only problem I see with the rivers is my main peeve with Wilbur...in the low land the rivers get really straight instead of the big meanders and oxbows you would normally see.

Straight rivers in Wilbur are usually because there isn't enough noise to make the rivers wander. The attachments show an exponential ramp going from left to right (very approximately the profile from sea to mountains) with varying amounts of noise:

37321
approximately 2% noise

37322
approximately 0.02% noise

37323
approximately 0.0002% noise (effectively no noise)

More noise results in wigglier rivers, up to a point. The last image shows what happens when the fill step is greater than the amount of noise: there are just a few straight flow channels. If you have a basin in Wilbur and fill basins then the basin will be flat and your rivers across the basin will look like that last image (straight and uninteresting). It's usually a good idea to add noise, fill basins, add a little more noise and fill basins again to get rid of large flat areas.

Ascension
07-24-2011, 06:15 PM
I must be working in that threshold area where every time I fill it comes out too flat. Maybe I just need more grays in the original.

arsheesh
07-25-2011, 01:24 AM
Seems to me to be a trade off: on the one hand, one wants the more squiggly rivers in the flat terrain, which requires using a decent amount of Noise. However, in my opinion, too much Noise causes the image to look grainy and over-textured, so if, as in my case, one want's to preserve a smoother map, then less noise is preferred.

Anyway here's a new version of the map. The client informed me that he preferred larger more snow covered mountains so I ended up redoing much of the map. Also, big thanks to Cantab, your suggestion totally worked man! I was able to crop the image to just the land, run it through Wilbur, and then resize the Canvas to add the sea back in again, thus allowing me to preserve the desired 50x70cm map size.

Edit: Oops, looks like I forgot to make the shallow water outline visible. Oh well, it'll show up in future updates.

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

moutarde
07-25-2011, 05:52 PM
Seems to me to be a trade off: on the one hand, one wants the more squiggly rivers in the flat terrain, which requires using a decent amount of Noise. However, in my opinion, too much Noise causes the image to look grainy and over-textured, so if, as in my case, one want's to preserve a smoother map, then less noise is preferred.


One solution (which takes a lot more effort though) is to use the lasso tool on your flat areas, (or I think wilbur has a tool to select all flat areas) feather the selection and add your noise exclusively to those areas, then run your rivers through. If those are too grainy afterwards, some light, selective blurring or smudging should help fix you up :)