PDA

View Full Version : The Great Divide - Fantasy Version



Diamond
01-28-2014, 08:34 PM
So I thought to myself, "Self, wouldn't it be neat if you did two maps at the same time, using the same title, but completely different themes?"

Instead of an intergalactic gulf, the Great Divide here will be a massive mountain range that splits the continent in half east to west...

Jalyha
01-28-2014, 08:54 PM
AWESOME.

Now you need a "Great Divide" Modern Version, and a "Great Divide" battlemap, and a "Great Divide"....


Nevermind... shut up Jalyha.... :P

Diamond
01-28-2014, 10:27 PM
You forgot Great Divide My Little Pony...

Scoopz
01-28-2014, 10:49 PM
Great Divide My Little Pony...

http://angryjogger.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/shocked-faces.jpg
(Sorry if you enjoy MLP, just... had to be done.)

Diamond
01-29-2014, 12:53 AM
I hate it with the unbridled fury of a thousand suns. Awesome pic. :D

rgcalsaverini
01-29-2014, 01:13 AM
Go vikings! Looks very promissing Diamond.
Aaaaaand what happens to be My Little Pony?

Jalyha
01-29-2014, 02:36 AM
My Little Pony are the most cutest loveable adorable sugaarandspice wonderfullest things in the whole world!


(Sorry, I have a son instead of a daughter, so I feel deprived sometimes...)

So... if you really don't know. They started out as little toy/cartoon horses for little girls to play with/watch. Then it became a sort of internet joke/meme and now everyone is on one side or another... so it really would make a great divide map :o

OMG I'mma go map Grundleland and the Dream Castle!!! :o :o :o <3

Lingon
01-29-2014, 04:11 AM
If ponies count as monsters, you could enter it in the Map Like a Monster challenge they're talking about in the suggestions section!

Looks great so far, by the way :)

Eilathen
01-29-2014, 09:33 AM
Looking forward to this, D. As always, great landshapes. Have a Like.

Btw, any news on the Panhartha front?

Diamond
01-29-2014, 02:34 PM
Thanks, E. You'll be glad to know that this map will feature hand-drawn mountains, forests, and other features. No pyramids or relief maps. :D

Panhartha is getting too big to work on; I'm going to have to figure out a way to either split it up into sections or merge layers in a still-accessible way.

Diamond
01-29-2014, 04:08 PM
Here's the first batch of mountains; simple linework in case I decide to paint in some color at a later stage.

Lyrillies
01-30-2014, 12:20 PM
lovely mountains! And an interesting project - I can see why you would put vikings in there, but why exactly did you choose arabs and russians? Any reason or just whatever random thing came to your mind and is interesting to have right next to each other? :)

Lingon
01-30-2014, 01:32 PM
Very nice mountains!
It'd be cool if you drew entire ranges like that, instead of individual peaks… :)

Arabs and Russians are pretty under-used in fantasy, I think. Has a lot of potential!

Jalyha
01-30-2014, 01:48 PM
Last 2 contenders for world power in most recent Rise of Nations marathon? :P

Diamond
01-30-2014, 03:02 PM
lovely mountains! And an interesting project - I can see why you would put vikings in there, but why exactly did you choose arabs and russians? Any reason or just whatever random thing came to your mind and is interesting to have right next to each other? :)
Pretty much random choice. I'm thinking about using Japanese cultures instead of Vikings though, so I can make use of those cool icons that Lingon came up with recently...

Very nice mountains!
It'd be cool if you drew entire ranges like that, instead of individual peaks… :)

Arabs and Russians are pretty under-used in fantasy, I think. Has a lot of potential!
I've actually drawn entire ranges like that on a couple of maps, and it's pretty exhausting. This is a good time saver. :D

Last 2 contenders for world power in most recent Rise of Nations marathon? :P
I've actually never played that game. I'm a steadfast Civilization guy - I've been playing old-school the last few months actually - Call to Power. Remember that?

Jalyha
01-30-2014, 03:41 PM
:D takin it back to the old school.


I'm torn. I'd love to see those wonderful icons put to use BUT I think vikings arabs and russians would be FUN :(

Eilathen
01-30-2014, 05:37 PM
Thanks, E. You'll be glad to know that this map will feature hand-drawn mountains, forests, and other features. No pyramids or relief maps. :D

Panhartha is getting too big to work on; I'm going to have to figure out a way to either split it up into sections or merge layers in a still-accessible way.

To the first part: now i'm a happy camper :D The mountains are already awesome!

To the Panhartha part: I hope you can come up with a solution. Because i would like to see the map in all its glory but also in one piece ;)

Diamond
02-01-2014, 10:26 PM
I kind of feel like the mountains are too big. What do you guys think?

ravells
02-01-2014, 10:58 PM
Yep, I agree. I think they're too big too.

Lyrillies
02-01-2014, 11:03 PM
I don't really have much of an idea about anything, but I do agree that the mountains look too big here. They kind of don't fit with the highly detailed coastlines. Which are very beautiful by the way!
As I see it there are two ways to fix this: either resize the mountains or resize the lines in the water just off the coast. Sorry, i have no idea what they are called, but if the distance between them was bigger the land would look smaller and thus the size of the mountains would be more fitting.

At least that's what I imagine, me with my absolute lack of real knowledge.

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 11:40 PM
and that's why bigger, fellas... ain't always better. O:-)


It's good though.. just... overcompensating O:-)

@Lyrillies: I can't help but laugh everytime I see your sig :P

ravells
02-01-2014, 11:42 PM
I'm trying to work out what factors my mind is subconsciously processing in coming to the conclusion that the mountains are too big - and I'm drawing a blank. The map has no scale, so what is it in the map that suggests the scale of it (my mind immediately thinks continental scale)? Perhaps it's the rivers? Or maybe the detailed coastlines and the concentric lines around them (what ARE they called??) as Lyrilles said. I really don't know but would be interested to hear what others think. (Sorry Diamond for potentially sending your thread on a slight diversion).

Jalyha
02-01-2014, 11:47 PM
It's the size of the mountains compared to both the size of the islands AND the waves at the shoreline.

Your mind automatically finds the largest and smallest readily visible image in an object and compares them - part of how we perceive distances in the big wide world :)

EDIT: And it seems like a continent due to the range of ginormous mountains swathed across the center ^.^

Diamond
02-02-2014, 02:26 PM
Yep, I think J just hit the nail on the head there. I've started to rework it with smaller mountains and it looks MUCH better.

@ravs: no worries. This board could do with more tangents, frankly. :D There's gotta be a proper name for them, but I always just call them coastal rings.

Lingon
02-02-2014, 04:22 PM
I agree, smaller mountains will probably make it look even better. And I'm quite excited about seeing how you'll use my icons, if you do! It'll be a first for me :)

I've always thought of the coast rings as stylized waves… so I call them wave lines. Maybe that's crazy though :D

- Max -
02-02-2014, 04:55 PM
I'm calling them waterlines :) Same, I think smaller mountains would work better regarding coastlines and stuff.

Diamond
02-02-2014, 05:04 PM
Okay, these are half-size mountains. I think they work MUCH better. For one thing, I can fit more of them in now, giving greater detail to a region.

Falconius
02-02-2014, 05:28 PM
The mountains fit in much better with the coasts now. Definitely looking much better, they look like they belong.

@ The coast lines topic: I've always assumed the outlined coasts were a stylized derivation of water depths from navigation maps. Didn't think of a good name for them like Waterlines or wavelines though... I really like wave-lines as a term for some reason.

Llannagh
02-02-2014, 06:24 PM
It's the size of the mountains compared to both the size of the islands AND the waves at the shoreline.

Your mind automatically finds the largest and smallest readily visible image in an object and compares them - part of how we perceive distances in the big wide world :)



Aaaaand I've learned something again. The logic of it is so obvious it almost punches you, but I never really thought of it like that. :)

Those wave lines, as you call them, in my head are shelf lines. To me the represent the continental shelves, gradually descending into the ocean. That sentence made no geograpgical sense whatsoever, I'm afraid, but you know what I mean! ...You know what I mean, right?

As to the mountains: Smaller looks better to me too. And as you said, that way you can add more detail, like valleys and passes and such.

Jalyha
02-02-2014, 06:36 PM
Pretty sure the lines are all of the above.

The waves cause the coast, which is usually a series of shelfs and the coast affects the waves. So they are coast-wave-water-shelf lines. Pretty sure that's not the official name for them, but I know that whatever you call them, everyone knows what you mean :P

@ Diamond - it looks a lot better now :P

I don't feel like the mountains are coming to get me :o

It DOES stilll look like *really* rocky country - makes me want to go on an ADVENTURE! :D :P

ravells
02-02-2014, 06:48 PM
It's the size of the mountains compared to both the size of the islands AND the waves at the shoreline.

Your mind automatically finds the largest and smallest readily visible image in an object and compares them - part of how we perceive distances in the big wide world :)

EDIT: And it seems like a continent due to the range of ginormous mountains swathed across the center ^.^

Great observation, Jalyha, but without an obvious scale the differences of size between the smallest and largest remain relative which takes us no further?

One possibility sort of along the same track, may be that it might have more to do us building up an internal framework of expectation from looking at lots of other maps in the past and (subconsciously) applying those to Diamond's map. So maybe it's a case of our minds saying something like 'In other maps I've seen where the waterlines are that big and the islands are that big and the coast is that fractalised, the mountains are usually smaller than the ones you have drawn.

I'm still not sure.

Jalyha
02-02-2014, 07:24 PM
Well... that's part of it.

We know how big a tree is. We know how big a house is. Sure, they're all different sizes, but the *average* is very well set in our minds, from a rather young age. So, if we see a picture (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/sellingpix/sellingpix1103/sellingpix110300057/9056615-life-of-a-dream-lawn-with-house-river-waterfall-tree-and-sports-car-fancy-island-in-the-air-isolated.jpg) with a tree, a car, and a house on a floating island, with a waterfall over the side from a small stream , and those three things fill the entire island, we know that the island is REALLY small... about the size of your backyard... definitely no bigger than a city block.

If the car - drawn exactly as it is - was appropriately sized beside the house, and the TREE was smaller than the car, we wouldn't think "tree", we'd think "bush", because, regardless of whether it's a map, or a painting, or a photograph, our minds know how big those things should be, in comparison to the tiny bridge, and the big house.

Same thing applies, or should, conceivably, to mountains and islands, continents, and coastlines. So people make maps that seem size-proportionate, and we view those maps and it adds to the depth perception we've been building since birth -- or rather... since we developed a vague understanding of the world outside what we've seen.

My 4 year old draws a picture. It's him, his mom, a house, and a mountain. There's no correlation in sizes. Usually, he's the most important thing, so he's biggest, then mommy, then the house. The mountain is either a big scribble off the page, or a tiny little thing off to the side. He knows "mountains are big" but he doesn't have a perception of that meaning yet.

EVERYthing in his world is big.

By around 5-6 years old, a kid will (typically!) draw himself bigger than mommy, a house bigger than both of them, and a mountain the size of a house.


If they live NEAR mountains, and see them every day, mountains tend to be semi-size appropriate

Another year and things go in order of size but they still aren't proportional. And then we start learning - really learning - geography, and once we understand houses are big but mountains are HUGE, the kids will draw towering mountains, medium-small houses and tiny people.

You can see how this affects depth perception by watching them fall. Little kids trip over *nothing*. They're just starting to learn the difference between a "big step" or a "little step" or a "giant" or "baby step".

As we get older, and our perception evolves, we balance more easily.

So... where was I going with this? Oh yeaah..

So we see a mountain on continent A). And it's about an inch and a half across. and we see an island near continent B) and it's about an eighth of an inch (didn't pull examples from your map, just explaining an example) and we think, ....well we don't really think... our mind just processes it, like any other size/depth perception... like:

Okay, the island is 1/8 the size of the mountain, must be a really big mountain or a really small island"

But if ALL the islands are similar sizes, and ALL the mountains are similar to the first we can't rationalize that. So we think "What a huge land. What gargantuan mountains!" "what a tiny coast!"

And your brain either just sends out a signal: "Something is off". or, depending on your visual experience, it says, the coasts are right, compared to the islands... so it must be the mountain!!! (or from the earlier example: "the car and the house are okay, it must be the tree!")

So even if the mountains are perfect, and everything ELSE is off, we see the mountains as flawed. :)


I did TELL you all I ramble... :/


xoxoxo

TheHoarseWhisperer
02-02-2014, 08:21 PM
Nice work Diamond. I'm on the side of the smaller mountains (and I'm also on Eilathan's side about the mountain style).

Regarding the Ravells/Jalyha conversation going on, I think the reason the mountains looked too big on the first version is that the thickness of the lines on the edge of the mountains was so much greater than on the coastline. The latest version, with the resized mountains, has the outline of the mountain-shapes more in sync with the coast, and therefore more appropriate. At least, that's my observation.

THW

Jalyha
02-02-2014, 08:36 PM
Nice work Diamond. I'm on the side of the smaller mountains (and I'm also on Eilathan's side about the mountain style).

Regarding the Ravells/Jalyha conversation going on, I think the reason the mountains looked too big on the first version is that the thickness of the lines on the edge of the mountains was so much greater than on the coastline. The latest version, with the resized mountains, has the outline of the mountain-shapes more in sync with the coast, and therefore more appropriate. At least, that's my observation.

THW

Oh that is prolly part of it too :P :P :P

Diamond
02-02-2014, 09:48 PM
That's actually a very good point...

Eilathen
02-03-2014, 08:25 AM
I'm one of those CGers that often "complain" about size-relations in a map. I guess it is sometimes an expecation kind of thing (as ravells said...if you almost always look at continental-scale maps and all of a sudden you look at a regional map then your view is skewed etc )...but not only . I think it always helps tremendously if the mapper includes a scale bar on the map...then size issues become apparent very quickly.

As for your map, Diamond, the second one is definitely much better.

Diamond
02-09-2014, 12:09 AM
Progress! Rainy weekends are good for keeping me inside and mapping. And God knows we needed some rain here in California...

I changed the shape of the continent a little bit; the first version didn't feel right to me, maybe because of that whole size/perspective issue. It felt like the landmass on the left was MASSIVE and the strip showing in the map threw off the balance of the whole thing. Much better like this. Well, I like it better anyway. :D

Jalyha
02-09-2014, 12:18 AM
Looks great, Diamond :)

Eilathen
02-09-2014, 06:40 AM
I like the new shape, Diamond.

Diamond
02-11-2014, 04:10 AM
Some weathering and color and a bit of stipple around the coasts. Also a first try at some forests.

Eilathen
02-11-2014, 06:33 AM
Hmm...not sure i "buy" those forests. They are, in contrast to the detailed mountains, too simplified/symbolical...and in that shape (pointed, triangle-like) too close to the mountainshapes so as to make it really hard to differentiate them from the surrounding mountains.

I like the coloring of the map...very smooth and easy on the eyes.

- Max -
02-11-2014, 07:08 AM
Looks great so far Diamond. I'd maybe try to go with smaller triangle shapes forests to see how it goes.

Caenwyr
02-11-2014, 10:41 AM
Looks great so far Diamond. I'd maybe try to go with smaller triangle shapes forests to see how it goes.
I concur, sometimes it's difficult to see whether you're looking at a tree or one of those mountain line thingies. But overall a very good map, and a great idea for tree icons as well! I like it!

Diamond
02-11-2014, 01:09 PM
Yep, I think you guys are right. I think I'll A) add some light shadowing to the mountains and B) reduce the size of the trees and see how it looks.

Lingon
02-11-2014, 04:44 PM
It's a lovely forest style, imo! They will probably work even better at the smaller size though :) The colors are great, I really like that touch of purple in the sea.

Diamond
02-11-2014, 07:39 PM
Okay, here's a portion with those two fixes in place - smaller trees, a bit of light color in the mountains. Thoughts?

- Max -
02-11-2014, 07:53 PM
Way better :)

TheHoarseWhisperer
02-11-2014, 07:57 PM
I like the update more than its predecessor. Smaller trees works better. I agree with Eilathen, though-- the trees do seem a bit too simplistic compared to the mountains, and it is a bit hard to recognise what they are without a legend or some forest-like colouring. Great looking map, though.

THW

Jalyha
02-11-2014, 08:14 PM
Twice as gorgeous as it already was? :)

Diamond
02-11-2014, 09:37 PM
THW: I'll experiment with adding some more 'texture' to the forests. maybe I can do some kind of subtle horizontal hatching under it to give it another dimension.

Scoopz
02-11-2014, 09:39 PM
I think adding a a gradient to the trees would really make them pop out. I.E. each tree has a greenish (and I mean barely greenish, parchmenty... you know what I mean!) hue which is pretty dark at the tip of tree and tapers off before it reaches the bottom.

Diamond
02-11-2014, 09:42 PM
That's something I had thought of trying. Wasn't sure if it'd make the trees too overwhelming though. I'll try it out and see.

Scoopz
02-11-2014, 09:51 PM
But you WANT those trees overwhelming. You want them TERRIFYING... menacing. LIKE THEY'RE RIGHT OUT OF GRIMM BROTHERS' FAIRY TALES. Or better scarier versions of them called, "Terror Tales". SO OVERWHELMING... they're sneaking up on you RIGHT NOW. *breath* Oh my god, they're RIGHT THERE. Holy mother of g-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH AAAAAAAAAAAAGH AGH. *hmmphf* Ok, maybe overwhelming is a bad idea.

Diamond
02-11-2014, 09:53 PM
I see someone has a tree phobia. Or something. :D

How's this? (Old trees left in for comparison.)

Scoopz
02-11-2014, 09:59 PM
It definitely lends them more weight/visibility without being too bold. I like it.

TheHoarseWhisperer
02-11-2014, 10:14 PM
Something still doesn't seem quite right about 'em (in my opinion). In your latest image, I prefer the old version of the trees to the new one, but something's still off...Unfortunately, I can't think of anything to suggest that isn't obvious (eg adding a green tinge, vertical lines for tree trunks, shadows etc.)

Jalyha
02-11-2014, 10:17 PM
Awww... trees aren't scary...

61307


And I like both versions, D:

Scoopz
02-11-2014, 10:18 PM
The spread might be a bit too loose. OR, and this is what I think does it for me, It appears to me that there's a disconnect between the trees and the mountains, the mountains being more detailed and the trees being curvy triangles. Again, just my opinion.

EDIT: Also, nice terrortree Jally.

madcowchef
02-11-2014, 10:39 PM
If I tree falls in the woods and no one else is around, it will land on and devour Jalyha. The trees remind me of the part in Cannibal the Musical where a certain fine gentleman shows off his credentials for inclusion in a certain indigenous group. I agree that the mountains are so nice the trees look overly simplified by comparison. As it would be a crime to change the style of the mountains I'd try slightly more detailed trees.

Jalyha
02-11-2014, 10:45 PM
Why me? D:

Fitting, though..

I think maybe just a *tiny* amount of detail to the trees, maybe :/ I like them uncomplicated (especially if they're going to come after me personally...)

madcowchef
02-12-2014, 12:25 AM
Well it is looming ominously over your signature.

fabio p
02-12-2014, 01:08 PM
I have to say I’m really liking this project and I'm also looking forward to see your progresses in the sci fi version of it (but I know you’re also doing a sci – fi map for the main competition this month, so you’re forgiven for not completing both projects as soon as possible :P).

As for the trees, I must agree with most people. I think the real problem with them is that, unlike the mountains (and compared to the mountains), which are simple but very recognizable as mountains, the trees are a bit too abstract. If you isolate one of the mountains from the context of the map, you still recognize it as a mountain; the same can not be said of the trees, which therefore are not entirely consistent with the mountains.
Of the two versions, I prefer the first, because in the second, the forests seem to me like rocks sticking out of the ground more than trees. It would be different, I think, if they were coloured green; but I also would consider a new shape for the individual tree, that could include the triangle as it is now (so that your initial preference for the tree’s shape wouldn’t be altered), but that could make more explicit the base of the tree (for example, drawing a hint of the trunk or/and closing the triangle to the base).

- Max -
02-12-2014, 01:20 PM
I like the new version and I'd go even a bit smaller again :)

Diamond
02-13-2014, 01:37 AM
After a lot of thought, I think I'll stay with the new, shaded trees. I think for the doubters, once I get some more done, it'll look okay. :D

By all means keep the comments coming!

(And Fabio, yeah I think I need to finish my challenge entry before I go back to scifi version of this...

Ilanthar
02-16-2014, 10:40 AM
I like your new trees... and that's quite an original way to do forests (I'll keep that in mind for future maps)!

Just waiting for the next steps. But it seems that you're quite busy right now, aren't you?