Hand-Drawing Mountains (and other mapping elements)

[Deuce]

I'm not sure if this is the right forum/thread so please direct me appropriately if not.

I decided I'd like to start drawing some of my own geographical features on maps rather than relying on downloads, for reasons that are probably obvious. Of course I don't have a lot of experience in such an area and so any advice people can give me would be most helpful.

Here is an attempt at a mountain range, done with pen and paper and then scanned: I will likely end up assembling maps digitally but draw the elements on pen and paper first. I haven't cleaned it up much so there are still a few pencil marks etc.



I'm not too worried about the topological plausibility of the range, more on the techniques for actually drawing it and what I'm doing wrong. There are a couple of messy areas I've picked up on myself but it's hard to know what I need to improve upon generally. Any critique/comment welcomed. Thanks in advance.

[Chick]

Hi Deuce,

I myself went through exactly this exercise a few months ago, and the resulting thread here

http://www.cartographersguild.com/sh...ad.php?t=28985

contains a huge amount of really excellent information and advice. You might start with that, and then come back here for more advanced help

[Midgardsormr]

I like it. The lighting direction is different on the upper angled part of the range than it is on the rest, though.

[ascanius]

There are a few things I noticed. The two mountain ranges coming towards the viewr, center right ones, are way too straight, the peaks and ridges line up way too much. The other thing is the mountain range that cuts across from upper left to lower right look weird, they need to show the slopes a bit more to give it more of a 3d feel.

[jshoer]

That's a great start. You've got a neat style going with the mountains on the right-hand side.

I would think about squashing all the mountains downward a bit, so they are wider than they are tall. One, in the upper left, just seems way too pointy to me. (It seems like an outlier, though.) Similarly, the mountains in the leftmost spur have lines that meet the ground plane at a steep angle, which makes them look more like freestanding boulders.

[Deuce]

Thanks for the comments, everyone!

Hi Deuce,

I myself went through exactly this exercise a few months ago, and the resulting thread here

http://www.cartographersguild.com/sh...ad.php?t=28985

contains a huge amount of really excellent information and advice. You might start with that, and then come back here for more advanced help

Thanks! I found that thread when I was first looking for tips on how to draw mountains, and tried to follow some of the principles people explained there... although I couldn't find it again when I came to post this, possibly because I was looking in the wrong place.

I like it. The lighting direction is different on the upper angled part of the range than it is on the rest, though.

That is intentional - the idea being to distinguish the shadows on the mountain slopes from the shadow they cast on the ground behind - although I'm inclined to agree that it doesn't really work.

There are a few things I noticed. The two mountain ranges coming towards the viewr, center right ones, are way too straight, the peaks and ridges line up way too much. The other thing is the mountain range that cuts across from upper left to lower right look weird, they need to show the slopes a bit more to give it more of a 3d feel.

The two smaller ranges on the right are those that gave me most trouble. It's handy in a way that these ranges (which are for a particular map) give a variety of angles to depict as each seems to present fresh issues.

In the upper left, this was also something which gave me problems. Assuming the light is coming from the right of the image, if the reverse slopes were shown it made it look as if the whole left slope of the mountain should be in shadow, which made them very dark considering not much of the reverse could be seen. On the other hand, not showing the reverse slope makes the mountain look strange and a bit 2D as you say. It obviously works better in the lower right where the the side most visible is the one directly in the light.

That's a great start. You've got a neat style going with the mountains on the right-hand side.

I would think about squashing all the mountains downward a bit, so they are wider than they are tall. One, in the upper left, just seems way too pointy to me. (It seems like an outlier, though.) Similarly, the mountains in the leftmost spur have lines that meet the ground plane at a steep angle, which makes them look more like freestanding boulders.

I think I see the pointy one you mean; I'm not sure what happened there. I think for some reason I naturally want to finish things off at a steep angle, as I found when drawing some fresh ones and despite bearing it in mind finding my pen curving downwards at the end of each stroke...

Anyway, I've tried re-drawing the range, with shading still to be added.


This is roughly where it looks to me like the shading should go, but I'm not entirely sure. In the upper left I've tried two different placings: one as in the first version, and one with the whole "near side" shaded. The second probably looks more accurate but I'm concerned that it will make the whole image very dark.

[Midgardsormr]

That is intentional - the idea being to distinguish the shadows on the mountain slopes from the shadow they cast on the ground behind - although I'm inclined to agree that it doesn't really work.

That's not quite what I meant. The upper part of the range (in your original drawing) is casting shadows to the south-west, but all of the others are casting their shadows straight west. I actually like the change in line direction to indicate the difference between the slopes and the cast shadow.

I don't care for the solid shadows as much. I think the hatching has a degree of charm to it—a stronger sense of personal style.

[Deuce]

That's not quite what I meant. The upper part of the range (in your original drawing) is casting shadows to the south-west, but all of the others are casting their shadows straight west. I actually like the change in line direction to indicate the difference between the slopes and the cast shadow.

I don't care for the solid shadows as much. I think the hatching has a degree of charm to it—a stronger sense of personal style.

Ah, I see! Well, that's something I'll look at. I'm not going to keep the solid shading: I just thought that was a useful way to work out where shadows should be going before going to the effort of doing all the hatching by hand since I can add and edit the solid shadow digitally and rather more easily until it's in the right place.

[outlawwolff]

Hope it is coming along nicely for you! I am constantly impressed by the level of detail everyone goes to not just for their drawings but for the constructive criticism too. Keep it up!