Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Sea World

  1. #1
      Nialas is offline
    Guild Novice
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    6

    Wip Sea World

    Relying heavily on tutorials from RobA and Ascension, I've come up with my first map. I wanted a map to represent the area surrounding a vast inland sea, and this isn't too bad for a first attempt. I could do a much better job of representing the hilly areas, but I really like the way the mountains turned out (except for the areas were the sea butts up against them - but I've got a plan for that).

    I used GIMP to develop this map. I'm looking for suggestions on better ways to portray the hills (right now its just a little bit of noise and an emboss). I'm also unsure what scale the map represents, given the detail on the mountains.

    Thanks for all the tips, tutorials and help here. I have no artistic talent, but I've amazed my friends with what I've been able to do so far.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Sea World-seaworld-01.png  

  2. #2
      bartmoss is offline
    Publisher Gracious Donor
    Facebook Connected
    bartmoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    896
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I like it, my only suggestion on style would be to tone down the contrast differences in the plasma cloud used for the "plains" texture. Also... since you focus on a large sea, adding some rivers may be a great way to "break up" the map and add realism.

  3. #3
      Ascension is offline
    Community Leader Ascension's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Charles, MO
    Posts
    8,216

    Post

    I'm likin it; the colors are very nice and yummy and the mountains are very crisp and detailed. As for scale, my first thought was some few hundred miles, if you increase the scale of the mountain size then you could cut the scale of the image down to maybe a hundred. I agree about adding rivers. I'd also use the lasso tool to wrangle those mountains into a mountain chain instead of splotches here and there. Lastly, I'd add some kind of foothills around the mountains. Excellent start.
    If the radiance of a thousand suns was to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One...I am become Death, the Shatterer of worlds.
    -J. Robert Oppenheimer (father of the atom bomb) alluding to The Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 11, Verse 32)


    My Maps ~ My Brushes ~ My Tutorials ~ My Challenge Maps

  4. #4
    Community Leader Facebook Connected Steel General's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ft. Wayne, IN
    Posts
    9,464

    Default

    I agree with what the others have said - this is very nice so far.

    Scale for me is one of the hardest things to decide on - especially in regional/overland maps. It might help to determine how big the sea is supposed to be, since it is the dominant feature.
    My Finished Maps | My Challenge Maps | Ghoraja Juun, my largely stagnated campaign setting.

    Unless otherwise stated by me in the post, all work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.



  5. #5
    Guild Artisan Greason Wolfe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tigard (and Florence) Oregon
    Posts
    725

    Post

    I'm thinking it looks pretty good so far. The one thing that threw me (mostly because my depth perception sometimes goes in reverse) was that, at first, the mountains seemed more like valleys until I mentally oriented the shadowing. Further thought led me to think that, perhaps, a bit of texture to the non-mountainous areas might give a better idea of elevation. As for the scale of things . . . I suppose one way you could decide (and sometimes I use this trick) is to pick one mountain in particular and give it a counterpart in the real world, say something like Mount Baker. With that as a basis, it might give you a better perspective of how large everything else is.

    GW
    When nothing is going right and you can't find someone else to blame, start beating your head against the wall, 'cause it'll feel so much better when you stop.

  6. #6
      ravells is offline
    Community Leader Gracious Donor ravells's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    10,902

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Greason Wolfe View Post
    I'm thinking it looks pretty good so far. The one thing that threw me (mostly because my depth perception sometimes goes in reverse) was that, at first, the mountains seemed more like valleys until I mentally oriented the shadowing. Further thought led me to think that, perhaps, a bit of texture to the non-mountainous areas might give a better idea of elevation. As for the scale of things . . . I suppose one way you could decide (and sometimes I use this trick) is to pick one mountain in particular and give it a counterpart in the real world, say something like Mount Baker. With that as a basis, it might give you a better perspective of how large everything else is.

    GW
    I had that perception problem too. I think it's because the light source is from the south east when it's usually from the NE or NW.

  7. #7
      Ascension is offline
    Community Leader Ascension's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Charles, MO
    Posts
    8,216

    Post

    I always put my sun in the southeast as well so I didn't have the same problem that some are having...so you at least have me
    If the radiance of a thousand suns was to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One...I am become Death, the Shatterer of worlds.
    -J. Robert Oppenheimer (father of the atom bomb) alluding to The Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 11, Verse 32)


    My Maps ~ My Brushes ~ My Tutorials ~ My Challenge Maps

  8. #8
    Guild Artisan Greason Wolfe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tigard (and Florence) Oregon
    Posts
    725

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascension View Post
    I always put my sun in the southeast as well so I didn't have the same problem that some are having...so you at least have me
    One would think that living in the northern hemisphere, such as I do, that I would be more acclimated to lighting sources from a more southerly position. Go figure.

    GW
    When nothing is going right and you can't find someone else to blame, start beating your head against the wall, 'cause it'll feel so much better when you stop.

  9. #9
      RobA is offline
    Administrator RobA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Niagara, Canada
    Posts
    5,532

    Default

    You could search the forums. I know there was a discussion some time ago about this effect and what causes it. I think that even though people who live in the northern hemisphere "know" shadows should be to the north, it is rare for people to see the real world from such an aerial vantage point. The inclination is to picture it mentally as a "model world" hanging on the wall in front of you, rather than you looking down on a horizontal surface. In this vertical orientation, lighting would typically be from above, or "up" on a map :0

    -Rob A>

  10. #10
      bartmoss is offline
    Publisher Gracious Donor
    Facebook Connected
    bartmoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    896
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    That sounds like a good, logical explanation, especially since your screen is actually a vertical surface in front of you. I interestingly enough didn't have a problem with this map's orientation, even though I am prone to it with photographs of the moon's or martian surface. Maybe a more asymetrical shadow, that is, one that is longer due to a lower angle of the sun, would help? That way, it should be easier to see that the shadows are on the surface, and not on an inside wall.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •