Opinions

[Sigurd]

Its very pretty.

A little too vibrant for a satellite image but that may not matter.

I like the continent shape.

Some of your rivers, especially on the north eastern mountain range, seem to run without regards for your elevation.

Your oceans seem a little small compared to earth, again may not matter. I tend to think that if the land\water has been around a while thin oceans will either widen or dry up.

But it's very pretty. How did you make it?

[DarkOne]

The exact question that came to mind: How did you create this map? How did you do the rivers?

[Redrobes]

Hi Waldronate, I reckon it looks very nice though if the planet is earth sized then, and for some reason I don't know, rivers tend to have a maximum width which from space makes them very small - prob less than a pixel on this scale, though I am sure you know that.

While your here tho and because you know your way around FT fairly well...

Is there a way of getting a 16bit heightmap from it and/or can you get a heightmap for the sub sea regions ? If not then can you generate a land, export the 8bit map, reimport it and subtract that from the original, scale by 256 and export that giving the lower 8 bits ? I am asking because The 'Thinking Big' thread has a collaborative map starting with an FT world...

[waldronate]

Hi Waldronate, I reckon it looks very nice though if the planet is earth sized then, and for some reason I don't know, rivers tend to have a maximum width which from space makes them very small - prob less than a pixel on this scale, though I am sure you know that.

Unfortunately the minimum drawing resolution using FT is one pixel. I tried to get around it a little by rendering at a higher resolution and then downsampling in Photoshop, but it seems to have left them a little larger. If the rivers would alpha out on th etributaries and/or change color based on flow then things would probably look much better.

While your here tho and because you know your way around FT fairly well...

I don't use FT all that much, really. It's the classic problem that once you have a world, you tend not to need too many more. If it did more than just basic terrain generation then I might use it more.

Is there a way of getting a 16bit heightmap from it and/or can you get a heightmap for the sub sea regions ? If not then can you generate a land, export the 8bit map, reimport it and subtract that from the original, scale by 256 and export that giving the lower 8 bits ? I am asking because The 'Thinking Big' thread has a collaborative map starting with an FT world...

For output to a heightfield, I would use File>>Save As and pick the "Raw Binary File" option. Then enter the desired width and check the 16-bit Integer Output checkbox. The output will have one integer bit corresponding to one meter of elevation and items below sea level will be negative. If you leave the checkbox unchecked then the output will be 32-bit floats (1 unit = 1 meter) with items below sea level as negative. The resulting image is the basic equirectangular projection suitable for wrapping around a sphere in your favorite program.

<rant>
I cringe a little whenever I see folks showing unprocessed FT output. The raw output was marginally acceptable back in 2000 when it wsa first released and there wasn't much in the way of editing tools in the product, but that was 8 years and about 8 releases ago. A lot of tools have been added for cleaning up the basic layout and many people seem to avoid using them. Admittedly, many of them are a bit rough and some of them are utterly mysterious (what the heck is a "moundtain", anyway). But they can be used to good effect. </rant>

[Redrobes]

Thanks, thats great as I know I will be able to get at float 1m res and it will save me having to make a subsea bathymetry type height map now.

I understand where your coming from with your rant. Your experience would be extremely well received with some tutorials on how to use the options and processing capabilities of FT. Theres lots of people here who use it a lot and give it a lot of respect which is does rightfully deserve. My islands app is just a hack to gen up some basic random noise and all the beef is elsewhere. FT Pro has that extra capability in it and its not being used.

If you don't know about the 'rep' thing here then its the widget of the scales and the little box by your avatar. So I should definitely give you some for that good advice. Its good that you pop in now and again.

[waldronate]

I have put a quick tutorial and made a different map using the same general techniques. I did get a little carried away with continent size, but check out http://www.ridgenet.net/~jslayton/CGTutorial/index.html for the steps I used. I'd post it here but I'm too lazy to chop it up into the required pieces.

On the plus side, I did discover some new FT bugs that need ironing out so it was good in that sense, too.

[ravells]

A thousand thanks Waldronate! If I could rep you ten times, I would!

[waldronate]

Its very pretty.

A little too vibrant for a satellite image but that may not matter.

I like the continent shape.

Some of your rivers, especially on the north eastern mountain range, seem to run without regards for your elevation.

Your oceans seem a little small compared to earth, again may not matter. I tend to think that if the land\water has been around a while thin oceans will either widen or dry up.

But it's very pretty. How did you make it?

The back side of the globe is mostly water so it balances out the relatively small and shallow seas on the near side. The attached image shows pretty much a similar state with certain views of our own globe.

This image was done in Fractal Terrains Pro in about an hour or so by application of a little brushing, a little basin filling, a little bit of incise flow, and using the Image Climate shader with the old example image I did way back when (http://www.ridgenet.net/~jslayton/Sample.bmp is the image used with the shader).

My goal was to show that there is a world of difference between raw data as generated by the FT fractal algorithms (which are pretty poor in absolute terms) and a little bit of human intervention. Next on my agenda is to put in a little more time and add countries, roads, text, and cities.

[su_liam]

You can still kind of see the Ridged Perlin in the overall continent shapes, but the distribution of highland and flat lowlandis is excellent; very realistic. The rivers do seem a little odd.

My opinion is that right now I am coveting FT for Mac with a lustful covetousness. I want a planet like that. Down deep in my loins, I want it.

The large scale landforms look even better(and less FTey)than Sorol. I'd love to see an atlas akin to the Sorolpedia done on this planet, with some very close in maps done.

I did it for the "I can recognize an FT map at 500 paces" crowd. I think I overdid the blur a little after size reducing it in Photoshop, though.

Heh... According to an interview I read, Mr. Slayton is part of that crowd.