PDA

View Full Version : Island Kingdom of the Grand Holdings



Hoseman
04-26-2006, 10:27 PM
Okay, in the interest of testing attachments (mostly), here is my first map after doing pgs. 16-22 (the section called "The First Map") in the Tome of ULTIMATE Mapping. There are still things to consider on this map (text is bleh, for one), but its not a bad stab at things.

RPMiller
04-27-2006, 12:32 PM
Not bad at all. It has a lot of character and potential.

Carole
04-27-2006, 02:14 PM
I like it! The shape of the continent is really nice -- when I went through the tutorial, my continent ended up being rather symmetrical and boring.

I have two comments -- please take them with a grain of salt because I'm also a CC2 newbie and don't have much experience.

1) I think that it's very rare to find a river that splits as it travels downstream, causing it to have two mouths. I could be wrong, though.

2) One thing that I found adds character to a map is putting a patch of shadows beneath trees, much like you surround the mountains with he background of gray. Try a dark or medium gray. This isn't my idea, by the way -- I got it from looking at Allyn's map of Altayn on the ProFantasy site. That's one of my favorite sample maps on the site. http://www.profantasy.com/library/default.asp?Keyword=first&PP=9&Start=37&Image=42

RPMiller
04-27-2006, 02:34 PM
1) Many rivers split as they go downstream. Any large hard terrain type could cause a river to split as would changes in elevation. At the very least they are forming deltas at the end of their journey at the sea. Here's an example of the Mississippi: http://www.google.com/maphp?hl=en&q=&ll=30.732393,-91.590271&spn=0.80505,1.145325&t=k&om=1

Carole
04-27-2006, 03:43 PM
See, I told you I wouldn't necessarily be right.

I do question, though, do splits of these types happen commonly where they result in two major rivers? The split in the Google map in Louisiana results in a rather minor tributary that wouldn't be shown on a map of a similar scale. Googling for Louisiana maps comes up with a number of much smaller-scale maps that only sometimes shows that tributary (if the map has lots of detail).

I probably should have worded my comment more carefully. I was just questioning how common it is for half of the major rivers to split into two major rivers.

By the way, I really like the tree placement in the map. My maps tend to be devoid of trees except right next to the forest. I need to expand my horizons on that.

RPMiller
04-27-2006, 03:58 PM
Ah... yes, now I understand. Here is an example of a major river whose tributary is also a major river: http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/us/A0833414.html

Then of course there are the various Niles. Of course another question would be just how close are we zoomed in on the map? If it was not the whole world, we could argue that yes those are minor rivers, and should be shown. I do understand your original point now though, and it is valid... for our Earth. ;)

Carole
04-27-2006, 05:26 PM
But doesn't the Missouri feed the Mississippi, and the Nile tributaries feed into the main river? I am considering the case of the river splitting into two different major rivers, which then each have their own mouths.

RPMiller
04-27-2006, 06:30 PM
Right. Yes, it is the opposite. Sorry about that. You were correct and so I started thinking in that totally different direction. Sorry about that. :lol:

Of course as I said, it is true on Earth, but who's to say it wouldn't be the case on other worlds. ;) Also, note that zoom level plays a part in the above map. If we are "closer" than I would consider those rivers to not be major and thus likely to split off.

Carole
04-27-2006, 07:35 PM
Aye, agreed!

In my current project, I'm actually excited to start zooming in on my continent map and start adding that kind of detail. I have to remember that streams and little rivers are very common.

RPMiller
04-27-2006, 07:44 PM
I look forward to seeing it!

Hoseman
04-28-2006, 01:56 AM
Wow...thanks for all the comments and dialog! I am glad my little sample map has generated some actual discussion! :)

As a bit of useful info, I initially saved my map image in jpg format with quality set at 100. Then I used Irfanview (http://www.irfanview.com) to rachet the quality down to about 50. The image went from 343kb to 91kb, but I could see noticeable artifacts, especially around text.

Well, I decided to save the 100 quality jpg image as a gif (also using Irfanview (http://www.irfanview.com) and it shrunk to 122kb. Larger than the 60 quality jpeg version, but MUCH better quality. Its perfectly clear now. The large blocks of color and generally low color count of CC maps lends itself well to the gif format.

I uploaded the gif version, so check it out now. The new attachment mod actually allows you to upload a new version of an existing attachment, so there is no delete/readd hastle. I'll play a bit more with this map this weekend and post an update...thanks again, guys!

kristof65
04-28-2006, 10:44 PM
As a bit of useful info, I initially saved my map image in jpg format with quality set at 100. Then I used Irfanview (http://www.irfanview.com) to rachet the quality down to about 50. The image went from 343kb to 91kb, but I could see noticeable artifacts, especially around text.

:D If Allyn shows up here and find you admitting to using jpgs, he'll tell you got what you deserved for using them! :D Remember - png = Good, jpg = bad

(said firmly tongue in cheek!)

Chris

GrimFinger
05-26-2006, 12:43 PM
1. I like the outline shape of the continent/island. It's irregular, much like real terrain.

2. You do a better job of placing forests than you do at placing mountains. Ironically, the largest mountain range, the one that you used the most symbols to represent, is the most eye-grabbing of the areas on your map, which is understandable, but simultaneously, it is the least impressive area of the map. of the three mountain ranges displayed on the map, I like the smallest one the best, the one to the right of the main mountain range.

3. Rivers are normally life paths through terrain, and tend to teem with vegetation. Your forests, for the most part, don't look too bad, but their placement seems to not be impacted by the flow of your rivers.

4. Your population center placement looks OK.

5. The look of your hills I dislike. Of all of the terrains that you displayed, the areas of hills is the least impressive, visually.

6. Of the swamps and grasslands, I like the swamp areas the best.

7. Some of your rivers look like they sit atop your mountains. That is aesthetically detracting. Otherwise, you have several rivers scattered throughout your map, and that is a plus. The absence of lake sor ponds does not go unnoticed.

8. Your rivers tend to split, rather than join from smaller flows into larger flows. But, this is how rivers are commonly displayed in CC2 maps.

9. Your pop centers seem to have few small settlements, compared to the number of larger population centers.

Lorne
05-26-2006, 05:08 PM
Very nice. I particularly like how you separated the pine forests from the deciduous ones.

Lorne

Hoseman
06-23-2006, 11:05 PM
Here is a quick conversion of my map into CC3 format. It was a quick conversion, but its quite a difference from the original map, huh?

It still needs work, however. I am not happy with some aspects of it, such as the countours under the mountains and the roads. However, I think it turned out nicely. I haven't found the symbols for the scales or compass roses yet, but that's coming. Tell me what you think.

Robbie
06-24-2006, 10:33 PM
BIG difference bro...lookin good! I think it needs some contour adjustment though...like you said...I think yer on the right track. Yeah find the scale and cartouche...the negative space is killing me.

Talamar
06-27-2006, 04:11 AM
Fact is,
I love both styles.
The CC3 style is pretty cool, but in some ways I still love the old CC2 look. It's... different.
I guess the first map would look much better if you would add some "sea-contours" (levels) to it. It would be more plastic then.

But nevertheless both maps are nice.

DaltonSpence
06-27-2006, 04:37 PM
If you are interested in a neat compass rose for your map, check out the Cartographers Guild Compass Rose Symbol - Crystal Rose (http://cartographersguild.com/viewtopic.php?p=277) thread.

--

Dalton "who just celebrated his 49th birthday by looking for his nephew's lost house key" Spence

RPMiller
06-28-2006, 02:13 PM
BIG difference bro...lookin good! I think it needs some contour adjustment though...like you said...I think yer on the right track. Yeah find the scale and cartouche...the negative space is killing me.
I agree. Maybe turn on transparency for the contours, and toss some random trees in there or something. Otherwise, looking great!