Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Another tryout - a success I think

  1. #11
      MadLetter is offline
    Guild Journeyer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    190

    Post

    Yet another test.

    I reduced the size of the trees to the minimum of 1 px.

    I also introduced variable river-width (especially easy to see at the big river).

    Lastly, I tried to create a swamp (right side).


    What do you guys think?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Another tryout - a success I think-pasis3_v1.jpg  

  2. #12
      jfrazierjr is offline
    Community Leader jfrazierjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Apex, NC USA
    Posts
    2,963

    Default

    Spot on.

    Joe
    My Finished Maps
    Works in Progress(or abandoned tests)
    My Tutorials:
    Explanation of Layer Masks in GIMP
    How to create ISO Mountains in GIMP/PS using the Smudge tool
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Unless otherwise stated by me in the post, all work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

  3. #13
    Secret Super-User StillCypher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    245

    Default

    I'm really liking where this is heading. The colors are very nice; your mountains look really gnarly; the water looks great, tho' i wonder if you could make them look a little less like they're floating on top of the mountains with perhaps a different blend mode or some shading; the trees -- I'm not so sure about. They look a little to 'sharp' to my eye. Perhaps some density, as pasis suggested, and some subtle variation in color?
    -÷-÷-÷-÷-÷-÷
    “It is not down in any map; true places never are.” (Herman Melville)

    “A good map is both a useful tool and a magic carpet to far away places." (unknown)

  4. #14
      Jykke is offline
    Guild Adept
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    393

    Default

    General about the used style:
    What I would like to see is someone taking this style a bit further and developing the look a bit. Now most of the maps look like they were done by the same person People should try their own textures and throw new styles & techniques to the mix.
    (Nothing wrong using tutorials.. but usually people end up with results quite similiar to the original one --> lacks personal touch)

    on this map:
    +I like your rivers and lakes
    -Forests might need some additional work
    -Mountains lack (finer) detail, wich is not too critical I think.

    ideas:
    Try to add a shoreline that blends with the ocean.. (semitransparent water near the coast.) It would give some extra look to this map & style

  5. #15
    Guild Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    94

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by StillCypher View Post
    I'm really liking where this is heading. The colors are very nice; your mountains look really gnarly; the water looks great, tho' i wonder if you could make them look a little less like they're floating on top of the mountains with perhaps a different blend mode or some shading; the trees -- I'm not so sure about. They look a little to 'sharp' to my eye. Perhaps some density, as pasis suggested, and some subtle variation in color?
    I think the issue with the trees is that the philosophy here clashes a bit with the philosophy you use for the mountains and other features.

    The mountains are satellite-realistic. They look like a photo that could have been taken from space.

    The trees are "symbols" of trees that stand for forests. But they aren't realistic, they are much more stylized as with antique maps.

    At satellite distances, no tree in any world will be distinguishable individually. My brain has a hard time, therefore, trying to figure out the scale on the map.

    This is a tradeoff and balance that cartographers need to recognize - how much weight do we give to realism and how much to stylization?

    I would think about looking for more of a carpet-like texture approach to the trees. The mountains (and everything else) are strong.

  6. #16
    Guild Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    94

    Post Oh - a technical shot in the dark?

    Perhaps the issue with the trees may be the sharpness rather than the size/clumping decision.

    When we see things at a great distance, the atmosphere blurs them and washes out some of the color. Mountains in the distance are more faint than nearer mountains.

    Thinking along these lines, you could try blurring/smudging your individual trees and de-saturating the color a bit?

    I am merely offering suggestions as they come in! Being a total newb I should probably keep my trap shut.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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