Shows how far behind I am in my CG reading
Nice map Ravs! I especially like the forests. How about a 5 min tut?
Sadly the alienskin Xenoflex cracks filter is a must have for this one...must find a way to duplicate it...do you know anything in Gimp or PS native filters which can do this?
Here is what I got with gimp, without the filter:
This was managed by:
- Turning the area into a selection, expanding that selection by 5 px, then turning the selection into a path.
- Create a new black layer, then fill the grown selection with white.
- Using my perpendicular smudge script, I stroked, using "inside through" with a 1 px brush, full pressure and hardness.
- new layer, fill with plasma noise, blur 5 px.
- distortion map the smudged layer with the blurred plasma layer.
- emboss the distortion mapped layer.
- delete the embossed layer outside the original area selection.
- set the embossed layer to grain merge blend mode, then use the curves tool to adjust.
How does the cracks filter look with longer cracks?
EDIT: A bit of playing an I got this:
Last edited by RobA; 05-14-2009 at 03:36 AM.
Sorry Rob, forgot to answer: Here is an image with longer cracks. Your version is really nice!
Are all these filters really just glorified actions of what PS or Gimp does natively?
Yes an no. I think waldronate has indicated that many of them are combinations and iterations of simple functions, nicely parametrized. This one looks a bit different, however.
Originally Posted by ravells
It look like the plugin is just picking randomly equidistant spots around the perimeter then performing a directional random walk that starts perpendicular to the boundary. Repeat until an edge is reached, the specified length is reached, or another path is intersected...
This is probably a bit too computationally intensive for a scheme script in Gimp, however. And my feeble attempt does not detect walk intersections.
Last edited by RobA; 05-19-2009 at 05:00 PM.
That's a lovely map and I am just putting it into my overall plan but I am having some trouble with the scale. If the tile is 600x600 mi then its really huge, if I scale against the Tile 11 scale bar then its as below. I think the scale in the top part of this map is a bit big by about a factor of 2 - 3 at least. If the whole map was 10 miles square then it would be much easier to fit it in. Any thoughts / ideas ?
Rob: Well, I'm just glad it does what it does. Past a certain (very limited) point the mathematics just defeats me, so I just go for the art. I see the filter like a fact of life, like rain or something...I guess. I know I'll never be able to make one like it but I live in hope that others might make it for free (not that I want to put the good folk at Alienskin out of a job or something) but good stuff should be shared...and filters (to me) are extensions of knowledge or the physical evidence of it.
Redrobes: I adjusted the scale in the second map I posted in this thread so it is about 10 miles square but I was really just guessing...if you'd like to tell me what a good scale should be for it so it fits into the tile, I'll happily change it...I have to say, I'm more of a 'feel' person than a science or maths person, so I'd gladly folllow your lead on the latter...it's this combination of art and science which makes the CG truly wonderful. It would be nice to have more sciency types though...I think the arty types are in the ascendent.
best to you both,
Well it looks about right when the whole map is about 6 - 8 miles square. Theres a big river on the main tile which heads into the lake from the west but in your map you have two rivers so I dont know if these are the main river or are two smaller rivers under the big one.
Say I place it like this then the grid is a 1mi grid so maybe try that size ? Shall I leave it there ?
Hmm can't really see at the resolution you've posted...can you post a bigger pic?
I've just taken another look at Tavor and remember now...I take the view that small scale fantasy maps are inherently inaccurate so that if a river looks close to a town or city on a small scale it might be somewhere else completely on a large scale....different maps drawn by different people at different times and without having a bird's eye view...inaccuracy when zooming in would be expected I think.
Last edited by ravells; 05-19-2009 at 06:00 PM.
Bigger map pic. I am easy with whatever you want just say where you think it ought to be on the map and ill stick it down there.