Thread: [WIP] Narridia, Revisited

Originally Posted by Lukc

(We really need to rope some other people into this thread, because it's actually a very beautiful and clean vector map you're producing here )

I think you've hit it pretty perfectly on the head with the smaller mountains ... it suddenly feels much bigger than before. A thing to consider is that mountains tend to form in lines (ranges) where the earth's crust buckles at tectonic boundaries. Now, for the kind of representation you have (basically: "here be mountainous and rough terrain"), you don't need to bother with indicating ranges (IMO) ... but you should think about what happens when those ranges hit the sea. The mountains don't end at the sea - they turn into islands, seamounts, underwater ridges and, often, accompanying marine trenches. I would expect at least the southern mountains to continue a bit further to the sides (east and west) with a few small islands or crags.

Lukc, I took your advice and created a few extra islands on the southern half of the continent. I did some long narrow ones on the southern edge of that continent, and on the southernmost cove I added three islands as well, turning the cove into almost a bowl. I was very busy yesterday, and I haven't had a chance to respond, but I'll do so once I get home later today. I thought about putting a few more on the SW edge of that same continent, but then the islands I'd add would end up going under the legend. I didn't see much a point to do islands that you couldn't see. If I ever revise the legend again, then I might go ahead and add them in.

I was looking at some other threads, and one of them involved placing tectonic place to help decide where mountains would logically form. I'll be honest, I never thought of that myself ... should I do something like that? In the future, I planned to place some lakes and other geographical features, such as swamps, forests, and hills, but I'm having a heck of a time getting things to look right.

Edit: Updated WIP with islands added in.

Yup, some people go that route ... honestly, it depends on how involved you want to make a single mapping project. If you want to go really deep into the whole thing, you'd make a geological history of the planet, size, mass, star type, plate tectonics, etc. etc. ... but it might turn out to be a bit much. Also, consider that unless you're doing a geological map, it might be unnecessary - you're not indicating the actual plate boundaries, you're focusing on the political map.

Personally, I think the new islands look good and also liven up the place

Originally Posted by Lukc

Yup, some people go that route ... honestly, it depends on how involved you want to make a single mapping project. If you want to go really deep into the whole thing, you'd make a geological history of the planet, size, mass, star type, plate tectonics, etc. etc. ... but it might turn out to be a bit much. Also, consider that unless you're doing a geological map, it might be unnecessary - you're not indicating the actual plate boundaries, you're focusing on the political map.

Well, truth be told, part of the reason why I'm doing it in Illustrator (although the same could be said for Photoshop) is so that I can maintain different layers which pertain to the different aspects of a map. So in theory, I'd have one overall layer for political, one overall for geographic, etc) Although you're probably right that tectonics might be a bit overboard for a fantasy conworld. I just want to do it reasonably correct, to avoid unnecessary hand-waving. What do you mean water doesn't flow uphill? Of course it does, it's MAGIC!

Originally Posted by Lukc

Personally, I think the new islands look good and also liven up the place

FUUUUUUUUU. The power went out earlier this evening, and even though I Saved for Web, I apparently didn't save normally, and I just opened up the file .... and my islands were gone. Luckily I *do* have an image version, so recreating shouldn't be too difficult. Blarg.

On a side note, I played around with the mountains, and got a nice 45 linear gradient going on them, so now they have a bit of dimension and "pop".


Edit: Fixed everything. Once you know how to do a certain thing, it gets loads easier later on. Universal Truf!

Sorry to hear that. I used to have similar experiences way back when I started using PCs. Since then, I always make a new copy when I start working on a file (or even in between, when I have major changes) and I hit ctrl+s about every 30 seconds.

yeah, maps are great for polishing illustrator skills!

Originally Posted by Lukc

(We really need to rope some other people into this thread, because it's actually a very beautiful and clean vector map you're producing here )

Since your map area is supercontinent size, I ripped a few images from geology.com and worldmaps to check a hunch.





Note how many rivers a continental plain has ... especially near the coast. Your map has far fewer rivers with vast tracts between them. The steppes of central asia and the desert of north africa are the only places on the sample maps that approach the riverless tracts of your map.

I think that your lack of rivers makes the map 'feel' more like an island than a continent.

Your map looks good. Interesting continent shapes, and the design and graphics keep getting better.

Good point atpollard ... however, I'd draw attention to the map of India (physical map) vs. the map of Asia (political) - the political map shows relatively fewer rivers (only the ones someone deemed "important").

A general observation from drawing contour maps and drainage basins: The coast generally represents the contour drawn at the level of the water (since most water is flat). A convex (bulge out) coast represents a small hill, ridge or slightly higher local terrain. A concave (curves in) coast represents a small valley, swale or slightly lower local terrain. Since water flows downhill, rivers tend to collect in the low parts. As a result, most (but certainly not all) rivers intersect the coast at one of the concave parts. Look at the sample maps in my earlier post to see what I am talking about.

A free observation of dubious practical use ... the general convex/concave shape of the coast tends to continue into the deeper water body. This affects local water temperatures and steers local weather patterns. As a result, concave areas of the coast recieve more rainfall and are more likely to be the place where a hurricane makes landfall. (based on observations of storm paths around the bulge on the west coast of Florida, just north of Tampa).

Originally Posted by Lukc

Good point atpollard ... however, I'd draw attention to the map of India (physical map) vs. the map of Asia (political) - the political map shows relatively fewer rivers (only the ones someone deemed "important").

Agreed. I chose maps that showed the rivers clearly, but not all rivers are important.

On the other hand, his southern continent is larger than Asia with riverless coastal plains larger than Europe ... and that (IMHO) makes the areas feel smaller than they actually are.