PDA

View Full Version : High quality land maps?



RiTz21
08-30-2007, 09:25 PM
I am thinking of publishing a board game, which requires (amongst other things) a high-quality "overland map" for the board.

I've been checking out all the various fantasy map makers, and I was wondering if anyone had comments on those. I saw Campaign Cartographer 3 (which looks good, but complex, and has no demo for v3), Fractal Mapper (which doesn't look as good as the others) and Dundjinni (which seems more appropriate for small scale maps).

Any suggestions?

Yes I have considered doing it on a contract basis, but I don't have much funds for a high priced artist...

RiTz21

Arcana
08-31-2007, 10:48 AM
You'd be surprised what some mappers in here would do for publicity ;) If you want someone to help you there's always our map request forum.

As for software...I am still a fan of CC3 only because I know it and its easy for me to produce maps in, but it has a steep learning curve. If you're already a capable image person with photoshop or Gimp however, there's some great tutorials here from our users on mapping with those as well as other tools Like Xara and whatnot.

Richardb
08-31-2007, 01:23 PM
CC3 has the best bang for the buck. It takes a while to learn, but honestly, I found it a lot easier to learn than Bryce! As soon as you realize that CC is not a paint program, get used to the CAD concepts, and learn the icons, it is pretty straight forward for most common commands. Heck, I think you can do a simple map on your first day. Mastering takes a good bit of time, but that is true with any program.
I think that you can produce excellent overland maps with the package, far better than Dundjinni, which is small scale oriented.

RiTz21
08-31-2007, 02:37 PM
CC3 does seems to give great output - Would anyone happens to know if the result can be user in a commercial game, or do they 'copyrights' their art and icons?

Thanks!!

RiTz21

Richardb
08-31-2007, 02:57 PM
CC3 does seems to give great output - Would anyone happens to know if the result can be user in a commercial game, or do they 'copyrights' their art and icons?

Thanks!!

RiTz21

All output is usable by the mapper commercially. They have very liberal terms called out on their website. Your derivative works are yours alone. It is just a CAD program with symbol catalogs, which are free for your use commercially on not. They cover it somewhere on their website. I checked with them a number of years ago over a map I was putting in a book. No problems.

Richardb
08-31-2007, 03:01 PM
Yep, all is okay - Here is the language from their website
USE OF SYMBOLS AND ARTWORK
This update includes a large amount of symbols, fill-styles and other artwork in a variety of file formats (OUR ARTWORK). This section sets out how you can distribute maps containing OUR ARTWORK.

(i) Subject to the restrictions in section ii and iii, you may freely distribute the maps you create using OUR ARTWORK in CC3 format, but not the source image files (PNG and bitmap artwork) associated with them. You may freely distribute flat files (for example BMP and PNG) exported from CC3 containing OUR ARTWORK. You may publish such maps for commercial gain.

(ii) You may not redistribute any map that in our sole opinion is, or appears to be, for the purpose of disseminating OUR ARTWORK. Think of your maps as documents, and our symbols as fonts. You can print a document containing Times New Roman font, but you can't give the font file away, or produce a "font book".

(iii) You may not produce commercial products which consist predominantly of floorplan-resolution exports OUR ARTWORK without written permission from ProFantasy Software Ltd. This includes but is not limited to PDF dungeon tiles.

pyrandon
08-31-2007, 04:11 PM
Just to chime into the old debate here: I must say (IMHO) CC actually has very little bang for your buck in comparison to either straight vector programs (Inkscape, Illustrator) or raster programs (Photoshop & Gimp). Why? Mainly because any CC map--while nice and very usable for 99.9% of hobbyists--will need to be post-edited for published quality (which says a lot about the capabilities of CC); but also consider that if the learning curve is steep for any program worth its salt, why not spend the time learning a program that is both incredibly flexible and self-contained? As many reasonable people believe, if the program that's best for you is the one you're most comfortable with, why not get most comfortable with the program that's the most powerful? As a final reason, Gimp/Inskscape are free.

Like I said, not to start the "grand debate" here, since I know we have many, many, many avid, long-time fans of CC here & it is definitely a high-quality app, but I just wanted to chime in to suggest you yourself look more closely at these other apps. :)

Good luck!

Richardb
08-31-2007, 04:38 PM
Just to chime into the old debate here: I must say (IMHO) CC actually has very little bang for your buck in comparison to either straight vector programs (Inkscape, Illustrator) or raster programs (Photoshop & Gimp). Why? Mainly because any CC map--while nice and very usable for 99.9% of hobbyists--will need to be post-edited for published quality (which says a lot about the capabilities of CC); but also consider that if the learning curve is steep for any program worth its salt, why not spend the time learning a program that is both incredibly flexible and self-contained? As many reasonable people believe, if the program that's best for you is the one you're most comfortable with, why not get most comfortable with the program that's the most powerful? As a final reason, Gimp/Inskscape are free.

Like I said, not to start the "grand debate" here, since I know we have many, many, many avid, long-time fans of CC here & it is definitely a high-quality app, but I just wanted to chime in to suggest you yourself look more closely at these other apps. :)

Good luck!

Not a problem for me, but I'll put my finished product up against most of what I've seen professionally produced and it all comes from CC3. The trick is knowing how to use it... truly understanding its features and capabilities. Also, part of the secret is in knowing what looks visually pleasing and not crowding your maps.
I have used most every app on the market, and have chosen CC based on results after trying and using everything. You would be hard pressed to find a package I don't own... (though perhaps not the most current version any more).
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and to use the tools they want. I will fully acknowledge that there are some effects that create almost photo realistic maps which are best done in adobe or another illustration program. But I will also say that most of those effects are not optimal for commercial usable maps. Many of the most beautiful maps are somewhat unusable in world building because they are too busy for the natural inclusion of labels, political or economic symbols, etc. A certain simplicity adds a lot to the value of the map in a practical campaign management scenario.
If you want to make works of art (which is very cool, just not my hobby) then CC is not the right too, I agree. There are many reasons for doing cartography, and different tools suit each. However, in my opinion, to create highly usable capaign maps that are visually pleasing and contain the right level of detail and informatin, CC3 is what I believe to be the best application.

RiTz21
09-01-2007, 03:33 PM
Here is the hand drawn prototype of what I'm talking about - evidently the new map should be commercial grade. It should also be 'editable' in case changes are needed (i.e. revamping territorial lines or something similar)

It contains provincial names, territory delimiters, forests, mountains, desert and seas etc...

http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n201/Moo_Master_of_Orion/Small_map.png

RiTz21

RPMiller
09-01-2007, 05:10 PM
If you could scan each of those sheets, they can be dropped directly into CC3 and traced over extremely easily. This is just the sort of map that CC excels at creating and being able to make future modifications is a breeze just a matter of moving a node here and there.

RobA
09-04-2007, 10:57 AM
Just to chime into the old debate here: I must say (IMHO) CC actually has very little bang for your buck in comparison to either straight vector programs (Inkscape, Illustrator) or raster programs (Photoshop & Gimp).
...
Like I said, not to start the "grand debate" here...

The big value of CC (or DJ or any other commercial offering) tends to be in the art and graphics bundled with it. It makes it very simple for a beginner to create a consistent, "nice" looking map when there is a good consistent library.

I have been involved with Dungeonforge/MapX community (http://www.dungeonmapping.com/df/public_html/index.php?name=Forums) and while I love the tool, the hard work has been in finding good, consistent symbols. Thanks to Istarlome, there are now a number of excellent sets bundled over in the downloads there, many that can be used in almost any graphic program.

-Rob A>

jaerdaph
09-05-2007, 07:44 PM
I think CC3 is a lot easier to use or learn, especially out of the box, than any other version of the program to date. I also think it "hides" a lot of the indepth stuff you can do with a CAD program very well for those who aren't interested with the included drawing tools. For example, in the past, you had to jump through all kinds of hoops to draw a land mass with an outline - draw it, copy it to another layer, change fill styles, change the color, multipoly. Now you just click on a draw tool and all that stuff is done for you automatically, and it even makes sure your land mass doesn't extend beyond the map borders.

RiTz21
10-09-2007, 09:50 AM
Thanks for your replies!!

I've opened up my Map Request here (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?t=975).

RiTz21