Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: There and Back Again - Please, share your opinion.

  1. #1
    Guild Journeyer Facebook Connected joaodafi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Brasil - Săo Paulo
    Posts
    103

    Wip There and Back Again - Please, share your opinion.

    Hello Everyone, I'm starting this thread because I start drawing a map, literally from scratch and would the feedback of you during the process.

    Well ... Actually, it will not be a completely new but a new version of the map, say the next step of this:

    First concept of this map, in December 2014
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PytNP3N.jpg 
Views:	57 
Size:	248.9 KB 
ID:	76087

    In late January 2015, then did it:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	dL3wwv5.jpg 
Views:	58 
Size:	1.71 MB 
ID:	76088

    I think it was in the month of April, using the Tutorial "Ascension atlas style," I got this result:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	FXetWYw.jpg 
Views:	68 
Size:	3.84 MB 
ID:	76089

    Finally based on the tutorial "Eriond - A Tutorial for GIMP and Wilbur" by Arsheesh, this week, I did this:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	HgFZLXy.jpg 
Views:	79 
Size:	470.5 KB 
ID:	76090

    Right, For this new version, the goal is to create a very realistic map and foremost, must be geologically and climatologically accurate. To this thought I'd start sketching the Plate tectonics but honestly do not know if this is the best place to start ... So please, tell how you think I should start this remake, considering I want an end result that has a landscape similar to the fourth image but does not have to be exact, especially the islands.
    Sorry any grammatical error, I'm better with Portuguese than English.

  2. #2

    Default

    I don't know enough of the nuances surrounding plate tectonics to incorporate them into my maps (at least beyond "mountains are here, so there must be plates!") but I know it is quite an undertaking to create a world from scratch, as it were. You've got a good start, keep it up!

  3. #3
    Guild Journeyer Facebook Connected joaodafi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Brasil - Săo Paulo
    Posts
    103

    Default

    ** First update **

    The Tectonic Plates
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Troa Tectonic.jpg 
Views:	41 
Size:	1.60 MB 
ID:	76099

    Plate Boundaries
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Troa Plate Boundaries.jpg 
Views:	51 
Size:	2.43 MB 
ID:	76100
    Yellow - Convergent Boundaries.
    Green - Transform Boundaries.
    Blue - Divergent Boundaries.

    Next step is to design the coastline and mountain range.
    Sorry any grammatical error, I'm better with Portuguese than English.

  4. #4
    Guild Artisan Pixie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Lisbon
    Posts
    939

    Default

    Hi there Joaodafi

    (Oi, tudo bem? Falo portuguęs, por isso, quando precisares, podes deixar mensagem

    Not only but also because you are a fellow portuguese speaker, I decided to drop a line or two with comments and general ideas. But, one thing led to another and I ended up doing more about your stuff than I antecipates (and possily more than you want to). Still, let me show you..

    I took your original map and superimposed on it your notes on tectonics. From there, I scribbled some notes about what could fit and what wouldn't. It was only later that I realised you were going to redraw the coastline, which means that my notes and suggestions are for the one you did before. With that in mind, here's what could be:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	joaodafi.jpg 
Views:	88 
Size:	729.6 KB 
ID:	76101
    Fist map is your own with some weird mountains on it (my addition, to make it easier to "read" the ridges). Second is your notes. Third is my notes on your stuff. Fourth is a suggestion for tectonic plates.

    One thing that is very important to do, if you want to have a go at it with more detail, is to decide on the scale of the continent. I considered this bit of land to be more or less the size of Australia/S.America... This matters because the bigger it is the more you have to take into consideration that the movement is on a spherical surface, on the other hand, on smaller maps, plates are few and "large" (relatively) and their movement is nearly/mostly linear.
    Either way, I think this what you should do first - decide where on to place your continent on the planet's globe. This will also (obviously!!) influence the climate in a great deal.

  5. #5
    Guild Journeyer Facebook Connected joaodafi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Brasil - Săo Paulo
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pixie View Post
    But, one thing led to another and I ended up doing more about your stuff than I antecipates (and possily more than you want to). Still, let me show you..
    more than I want ? No, more information and criticism, better the map will be.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pixie View Post
    I took your original map and superimposed on it your notes on tectonics. From there, I scribbled some notes about what could fit and what wouldn't. It was only later that I realised you were going to redraw the coastline, which means that my notes and suggestions are for the one you did before.
    Thank you very much, your opinion is very important to me, because -> This Map <- is my main inspiration, for this part of the process, your notes will be of great value. Honestly, I have to study more about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pixie View Post
    One thing that is very important to do, if you want to have a go at it with more detail, is to decide on the scale of the continent. I considered this bit of land to be more or less the size of Australia/S.America... This matters because the bigger it is the more you have to take into consideration that the movement is on a spherical surface, on the other hand, on smaller maps, plates are few and "large" (relatively) and their movement is nearly/mostly linear.
    Either way, I think this what you should do first - decide where on to place your continent on the planet's globe. This will also (obviously!!) influence the climate in a great deal.
    Since you brought it up, the size of the continent is roughly the territory of the image below. But the planet's size is about two and a half times the size of Earth, with an inclined axis in eleven degrees. And the continent is in the Northern Hemisphere, and the equator not appear on the map because it is far to the south, (or the continent is far to the north, if you prefer that).
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Tamanho Aprocimado de Troa.png 
Views:	42 
Size:	215.0 KB 
ID:	76117

    (Na próxima vez que eu for a lisboa, te pagarei uma cerveja, por essa ajuda)
    Last edited by joaodafi; 09-19-2015 at 09:59 PM.
    Sorry any grammatical error, I'm better with Portuguese than English.

  6. #6
    Guild Expert jbgibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,429

    Default

    So if Earth is about 13000 km diameter = 40 000 km circumference = 510 million sq km. surface

    2.5x the diameter = 32 500 km diameter = 102 000 km circumference = 3.3 billion sq km surface

    2.5x the circumference would be the same

    But 2.5x the surface area (about 1 and a quarter billion sq km) would be only 20000 km diameter or a bit over 63 000 km circumference.

    So which way do you want it 2.5x bigger? The reason I ask is that the smaller portion of the whole surface that your Africa+Europe sized continent is, the more plausible it would be for it to all be on one tectonic plate. You don't *have to* show a bunch of intersections and work out their activity. All on one present-day plate would not have to mean a featureless plain - there could be numerous old collision or subduction-volcano / uplift mountain ranges. And depending on your planet's amount of erosion activity, some could look young and rough, others old and worn down.

  7. #7
    Guild Grand Master Azélor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Québec
    Posts
    3,363

    Default

    Gravity could be a problem at that size.

  8. #8
    Guild Journeyer Facebook Connected joaodafi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Brasil - Săo Paulo
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jbgibson View Post
    So if Earth is about 13000 km diameter = 40 000 km circumference = 510 million sq km. surface

    2.5x the diameter = 32 500 km diameter = 102 000 km circumference = 3.3 billion sq km surface

    2.5x the circumference would be the same

    But 2.5x the surface area (about 1 and a quarter billion sq km) would be only 20000 km diameter or a bit over 63 000 km circumference.
    You're right, I should be more specific. And yes, the planet has 2.5x the surface area of the earth. The continent has, from north to south, approximate 11 200 km from east to west and 7 500 km.

    Quote Originally Posted by jbgibson View Post
    So which way do you want it 2.5x bigger? The reason I ask is that the smaller portion of the whole surface that your Africa+Europe sized continent is, the more plausible it would be for it to all be on one tectonic plate. You don't *have to* show a bunch of intersections and work out their activity.
    I know I do not need to, as you said, "show a bunch of intersections and work out Their activity" but I think that is a good theoretical and creative exercise.

    Quote Originally Posted by jbgibson View Post
    All on one present-day plate would not have to mean a featureless plain - there could be numerous old collision or subduction-volcano / uplift mountain ranges. And depending on your planet's amount of erosion activity, some could look young and rough, others old and worn down.
    Good idea, so it is possible to simplify the tectonic part without losing the possibility to create geographical diversity. Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azelor View Post
    Gravity could be a problem at that size.
    Why could be a problem? I mean geographically.
    Sorry any grammatical error, I'm better with Portuguese than English.

  9. #9
    Guild Grand Master Azélor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Québec
    Posts
    3,363

    Default

    It's mostly a problem for those living on the planet. Although, higher gravity could possibly affect the height of the mountains and the atmospheric circulation.

    It might not be a problem, my initial calculation gave me 1,02G but I'm not sure I got it right. (by using a radius of 16250km)

    Apparently, you need the mass and the radius of the planet compared to Earth. The ratio of mass your_planet/earth is probably greater than one. I think larger objects tend to have a higher density but not always if there is more % water than on Earth, for example.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_gravity
    Last edited by Azélor; 09-19-2015 at 10:21 AM.

  10. #10
    Guild Journeyer Facebook Connected joaodafi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Brasil - Săo Paulo
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azelor View Post
    It's mostly a problem for those living on the planet.
    I could answer that by saying "Relax, it's just fantasy," but to have a valid argument, I say "The living beings on the planet are fully adapted to the conditions of the planet, remembered the life of the planet is original from there, not living beings land on another planet. "

    Quote Originally Posted by Azelor View Post
    Although, higher gravity could possibly affect the height of the mountains and the atmospheric circulation.
    Well... Fantasy!
    Sorry any grammatical error, I'm better with Portuguese than English.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •