High quality land maps?

[pyrandon]

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]

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]

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...



RiTz21

[RPMiller]

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.

[jaerdaph]

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.

[RobA]

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/pub...hp?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>