Another practice map

**Lyandra** · 06-09-2012, 03:07 AM

Thanks Megahercio.
I guess the way I drew the forests you can't really say if they are conifer or mixed. I would imagine that higher in the mountains it would be conifer and in the lowlands mixed. I have to admit though that I haven't given much thought to that. I tried to draw the forests along the slopes, the higher parts I left bare on purpose, thinking that there mountains would consist mainly of bare rock.

**Megahercio** · 06-09-2012, 05:24 AM

Originally Posted by Lyandra

Thanks Megahercio.
I guess the way I drew the forests you can't really say if they are conifer or mixed. I would imagine that higher in the mountains it would be conifer and in the lowlands mixed. I have to admit though that I haven't given much thought to that. I tried to draw the forests along the slopes, the higher parts I left bare on purpose, thinking that there mountains would consist mainly of bare rock.

With conifer or not I mean the symbol you use to draw the forest. If it is a circle or oval is not a conifer and if it is a cone, by example, could be a conifer forest. I think in not too high monutains the forest mark the slopes more even than the rocks. Anyway is only one aspect more, not important, other way to make the relief. I put two examples of what I want to mean. Not as perfect as yours in anyway but maybe will give you an idea of what I mean (the idea is that we can develop more the forest forms in a draw, as other aspect of the landscape to make it more realistic if you want, of course). Other aspect would be the sunny and shady parts of the mountains, where the trees reach diferents altitudes.

Attachment 45495

This is more a sketch

Attachment 45496

**Lyandra** · 06-09-2012, 05:40 AM

Megahercio: I cannot open the attachments, sorry.

As to differentiating the forests I used to do that but I kind of like this simplistic way of drawing them that I now use. They could represent conifer forests I suppose, so I would have to develop a new way of representing mixed forests if I wanted to make the difference between them. For now my map just says: "here be forests", without telling you what kind of forests.^^ I think that the mountains on my map might be quite high, I don't know, they are not too realistic all things considered. The thing about sunny and shady parts is a good point though. I will have to plan my next map more carefully, this time I just sort of drew it without worrying about realism too much

**Megahercio** · 06-09-2012, 08:10 AM

Alright Lyandra, it was just other point of view about this theme of forest, surely with hypertrophy by my side. I see you have superseded it in your style.

**Lyandra** · 06-09-2012, 08:30 AM

Megahercio, I was glad to hear what you had to say. The maps I posted are mostly just experiments. I'm trying out different styles at the moment, but for now they are not too realistic. Your comments were valuable and I thank you for them.

That's one of the reasons why I wanted to become part of this community, to get honest critique by people who love maps as much as I do, who will notice things I might have otherwise overlooked. To learn from them.

**Megahercio** · 06-09-2012, 09:15 AM

Yes I understood this, don't worry

. But I didn't find the way to explain myself.
I think the idea is that a map can be fantastic and realistic at the same time. I have find a better example in this links of geological maps:

http://www.elsoto.org/formaciones_geologicas.htm

You have talent for this kind of maps as less, and you are able to make what you want. Then to include this details I think would make your maps richer (even more I meant).
But as I said maybe you knew all that and have leave this stage superseded. (I don't speak english, really I traslate from spanish with english words and it make my speech a little confuse), was just a posibility.

This time I think I said it clear.

**Lyandra** · 06-09-2012, 09:29 AM

Thanks for the link. I always liked those "painted" realistic maps, so you might say that to achieve this level of detail and realism is one of my goals. Thanks for thinking that I'm up to it.

I agree that it would enrich my maps and make it easier for the viewer to envision himself being there (I personally like to do that^^). So, those maps I posted are just a beginning. I hope to experiment with many styles though, not only this semi-realistic "bird eye view" style.