Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: CC/FM/Other Symbol based software question

  1. #1
    Community Leader jfrazierjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Apex, NC USA
    Posts
    3,057

    Post CC/FM/Other Symbol based software question

    Since I don't really use CC and that is the biggest symbol based software I know of, I have thought about creating some mountain symbols based off of my tutorial style. Anyway, what is the general size in pixels people tend to make these at to both nice look and fairly decent file size in png format? Would 300 x 300 at 100 ppi be good or should it go higher or lower?

    My thought was to do a few mountain symbols in a variety of orientations, including single mountains, a few 1-2-1 (one mountain on top, two below, one at the bottom), as well as a few that go diagonal \ and /. I also was thinking at least 3 different color pallets, brown, white and perhaps a grey? Thoughts?
    My Finished Maps
    Works in Progress(or abandoned tests)
    My Tutorials:
    Explanation of Layer Masks in GIMP
    How to create ISO Mountains in GIMP/PS using the Smudge tool
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Unless otherwise stated by me in the post, all work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

  2. #2

    Post

    I'd go twice that size, just in case a user wants to print at a higher resolution. A one-inch mountain is probably sufficient for most uses, but it never hurts to be prepared for bigger ones. And since it's much easier to scale down than up...

    I'd say a good rule of thumb for sizing raster assets should be to assume that it will be printed at 300 dpi, then set your pixel size a little higher than what you anticipate people will actually want to use. It'll make your file sizes rather larger, but it will also make the collection more generally useful.

    That's just my opinion, of course, and if file size is of primary importance, then the equation changes. I suspect, though, that at the size you're working at, you'll easily be able to keep the project under 1 MB, unless you make a lot of mountains.
    Bryan Ray, visual effects artist
    http://www.bryanray.name

  3. #3
    Community Leader jfrazierjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Apex, NC USA
    Posts
    3,057

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Midgardsormr View Post
    I'd go twice that size, just in case a user wants to print at a higher resolution. A one-inch mountain is probably sufficient for most uses, but it never hurts to be prepared for bigger ones. And since it's much easier to scale down than up...

    I'd say a good rule of thumb for sizing raster assets should be to assume that it will be printed at 300 dpi, then set your pixel size a little higher than what you anticipate people will actually want to use. It'll make your file sizes rather larger, but it will also make the collection more generally useful.

    That's just my opinion, of course, and if file size is of primary importance, then the equation changes. I suspect, though, that at the size you're working at, you'll easily be able to keep the project under 1 MB, unless you make a lot of mountains.
    Well.. my goal is to try to make 5-10 single mountains, a 2-3 1-2-1 mountains, and several 10-15 or so hill combinations. Then multiply that by 3 colors.
    My Finished Maps
    Works in Progress(or abandoned tests)
    My Tutorials:
    Explanation of Layer Masks in GIMP
    How to create ISO Mountains in GIMP/PS using the Smudge tool
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Unless otherwise stated by me in the post, all work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

  4. #4
    Community Leader Facebook Connected Ascension's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Charles, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    8,392

    Post

    I'm with Midgard on the size thing...after all a future challenge will be that one where GamePrinter prints something at some freakishly huge size (or something like that). Plus, bigger things allows me more wiggle room to adapt and change things to how I want
    If the radiance of a thousand suns was to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One...I am become Death, the Shatterer of worlds.
    -J. Robert Oppenheimer (father of the atom bomb) alluding to The Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 11, Verse 32)


    My Maps ~ My Brushes ~ My Tutorials ~ My Challenge Maps

  5. #5
    Administrator Redrobes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7,196
    Blog Entries
    8

    Post

    You can always resample down but not so easy up. Having said that if its pen and ink B&W stuff then going up is ok so it makes little difference. Basically, make sure that whatever lines you draw on the page are at the very least 5 - 10 pixels wide.

  6. #6
    Community Leader jfrazierjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Apex, NC USA
    Posts
    3,057

    Post

    Thanks for the comment guys... here is the thread: http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?t=3728
    My Finished Maps
    Works in Progress(or abandoned tests)
    My Tutorials:
    Explanation of Layer Masks in GIMP
    How to create ISO Mountains in GIMP/PS using the Smudge tool
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Unless otherwise stated by me in the post, all work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

  7. #7

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascension View Post
    I'm with Midgard on the size thing...after all a future challenge will be that one where GamePrinter prints something at some freakishly huge size (or something like that). Plus, bigger things allows me more wiggle room to adapt and change things to how I want
    Since I'm not an online gamer at all, and I never heard of VTT until RPMiller introduced me to the idea over a year ago. I had never perceived a map to be less than large format size. Sure one can create a letter sized reduced version to be included in a PDF adventure, but for actual miniatures use you require large format. I don't think of it as freakishly huge. I generally think of screen resolution maps as freakishly tiny.

    When you buy a boxed edition of a WotC campaign setting, it usually comes with a map that is at least 17 x 22 if not larger - is that freakish? I've never got a boxed edition with a postage stamp sized map.

    The PNG mountain objects I created for my November 07 challenge are about 4 inches tall at 200 ppi each - that way a user can downsize to whatever they want or use at full scale for maps larger than I would make. The download zip file is still available in that thread, linked via my website. I created almost 200 mountains, hills, and other land forms. (All hand drawn work in that though.)

    http://forums.cartographersguild.com...ead.php?t=1105

    I'm better informed these days, but I still think large format is the preferred size for maps, since most gamers I know use miniatures and play tabletop games.

    GP

    PS: now I bring a laptop with Character Tool for my character sheets in our weekend D&D game, and all the players, including the 20 year olds look at me like a freak that I'd bring a computer into tabletop game?!
    Last edited by Gamerprinter; 12-19-2008 at 03:18 PM.
    Gamer Printshop Publishing, Starfinder RPG modules and supplements, Map Products, Map Symbol Sets and Map Making Tutorial Guide
    DrivethruRPG store

    Artstation Gallery - Maps and 3D illustrations

  8. #8

    Default

    I love large format maps too. There's nothing like the feeling of unrolling one on the gaming table, one which has tonnes of information and locations on it and on which you have to weigh the corners down with whatever comes to hand.

Posting Permissions

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