Quote Originally Posted by cantab View Post
One thing you can try is raising the terrain to some power, then dividing down to get the desired peak mountain height. That creates a distinction between flat lowlands and rugged uplands, which I think is a bit more realistic. (You will have to abandon bathymetry by changing negative altitudes to zero, unless you want to be limited to odd integer powers.)

Not sure if FT can do stuff like that. Wilbur can, and I know there are guides to transferring data between FT and Wilbur.
So, for instance, squaring the heights of each pixel, then finding the high point (say it's now 66k ft elevation), and then dividing all elevations by 3 to bring it down to 22k ft elevation? (Obviously those numbers are completely made up) Interesting concept. I'll have to play around with that, see what I can make FT do. I downloaded Wilbur at one point, but have never used it. FTPro has a math modification ability, but it's one of the things I haven't messed with yet also.