Stern's Bridge

[jfrazierjr]

Do you still have your original "sketch" as a separate image? If so, I would HIGHLY suggest starting over with that and then build everything in layers. When you want to use the magic want tool, I typically have to hide (click the eyeball) most other layers so it does not get greedy with the selection. Not doing this is part of the reason you are having the magic wand tool get all sorts of other stuff since you also had some parchment texture and it was trying to be magical......

[RobA]

Here is a handy video tut showing how to clean up a scanned image using the curves tool, and set it up to start colouring on a (or many) separate layers. Not specific for mapping, but useful for any new gimp user.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&v=-wYMbp3jNwo&gl=US

-Rob A>

[Feralspirit]

Do you still have your original "sketch" as a separate image? If so, I would HIGHLY suggest starting over...

I'm crushed. I went through a whole range of emotions upon reading your post. Thanks, I think you might be right.

When this thread moved from introductions to WIP it was my intention to use this map to educate myself, and I just started proceeding with what I already knew.

My original sketch has many flaws and holes in the lines, I think possibly a few more after using the process RobA pointed me at. I am reducing everything to black and white, redefining my lines, and saving that image as 'lines' (using .xcf). If I'm not mistaken (my understanding of the software and tut instructions may still be flawed) I can then copy the outline of my river onto a new layer. Am I good so far?

[torstan]

Once you have a layer with your lines on it, you're halfway there. Now you can use the magic wand tool to select areas. After you've selected an area go to Select->Grow Selection and add a couple of pixels so that the selection runs down the middle of your lines rather than along the edge of them.

Now create a new layer (in the layers dialogue) and fill (Edit->Fill Selection) to fill the area with colour.

This will colour over some of the line. To avoid this, keep the lines layer on the top (click and drag them in the layers dialogue). Now set the lines layer mode to multiply - this will only use the black parts (the lines) of the layer and not the white, allowing you to see the colour below.

I hope this helps with the next step.

[jfrazierjr]

I'm crushed. I went through a whole range of emotions upon reading your post. Thanks, I think you might be right.

Sorry! I think everyone just assumed that since you were using GIMP to do the editing, that you already knew about using layers. Going back now and rereading some of your posts, some of it makes a bit more sense in context. But yea....as Torstan said, once you get your lines down (all in one layer or in separate one's for road, buildings, water, trees, etc) the process of filling in the base colors should only take you a few minutes to get back to where you were. I would keep the line's separate from the fill colors also. Example Layers:

Building Lines
Building Color
Road Lines
Road Color
Tree Lines
Tree Color
Tree Texture
Water Line
Water Color
Water Texture
Grass Color
Grass Texture

Of course, that's just an example, but hopefully you get the drift. Also, if you use a layer mask on each of the color layers to get the color to show through, but only where you want it to, when you want to go back and change the color of something, you don't have to do a bunch of selections anymore, so you might want to think about that.... In this case, with layer masks in use, I just color the entire layer a new color/shade for example, and Layer mask takes care of where it should show through. Of course... you might want to get used to GIMP a bit more before you take that step, but it's something to think about.

[Nytmare]

Also, the work that you've already done isn't a wasted! You can easily copy and paste that into the new document as a new layer and edit out what isn't needed.

[Feralspirit]

Ok, after a ton of procrastination, I am trying to work through the BIG TUT on using GIMP by RobA (I realize not all of it is applicable to my scale, but wanted to do it for educational value...). So, in first steps of defining land and river, I have a problem, I already have structures protruding into my water definition.



I think I should just take them out of this layer, trusting that I can bring them back in later layers, but I don't want to lose them. I thought I had better ask.

Also, a close look will reveal my blur settings. Are they good or should I change them?

[RobA]

Hi Feralspirit-

Since you invoked my name I figured I;d respond with what I do.

I try to keep structures like docks and bridges on their own layer, separate from land, separate from buildings, and separate from roads. Mainly so that I can go back later and give them their own shadow, showing their height.

-Rob A>

[Feralspirit]

Hi. () Sorry to keep everyone (or anyone?) in suspense. I wish I could say that the time I've spent since posting last was clearly evident in this post. Obviously, I cannot. I can say that I'm learning a great deal, but even that is a long slow road (lots of trial and error).

I wanted to throw my map's current state up to see what everyone has to say or suggest. There is still a long list of points that I am not quite happy with. Even so, I think it's progressing towards a state that I will be happy with (I hope).

Thank you to torstan. His user profile holds a beautiful water texture that I promptly jumped on. I thought it would be perfect to add a surface to my river. It wasn't. Sorry torstan, I had to tweak it a little bit, to tone it down. I do think it now serves the purpose I intended very well. Your name, and the original, remain in my patterns dialogue.

I have yet to do anything substantial with Ascension's trees technique, but I continue to think my trees need a little help, so I will probably do some work with his instructions in front of me.

You see that blueish-green area in the NE that kind of runs into the forest, that's supposed to be marsh/swamp. I am still very unhappy with that, but that's the best I've come up with so far. The forest is actually covering a great deal of it, as well. To me, this runs against the point of cartography, which is to convey information, not obscure it. Unless I can figure something out, or one of you can suggest something, I may end up tearing down that part of the forest.



Any and all suggetstions/observations are welcome (read 'needed'), and will be considered in a less-than-timely manner. Thanks.

P.S. The roads and buildings are not in a finished state, I keep the roads up as guides until I figure out what I'm going to do with them. Speaking of buildings, the bevel function generates a dark side on the SE. The only way I've thought of to fix it is to rotate the entire picture 180, bevel, and rotate back. Anyone have anything better?

[jfrazierjr]

Hi. () Sorry to keep everyone (or anyone?) in suspense. I wish I could say that the time I've spent since posting last was clearly evident in this post. Obviously, I cannot. I can say that I'm learning a great deal, but even that is a long slow road (lots of trial and error).

I wanted to throw my map's current state up to see what everyone has to say or suggest. There is still a long list of points that I am not quite happy with. Even so, I think it's progressing towards a state that I will be happy with (I hope).

Thank you to torstan. His user profile holds a beautiful water texture that I promptly jumped on. I thought it would be perfect to add a surface to my river. It wasn't. Sorry torstan, I had to tweak it a little bit, to tone it down. I do think it now serves the purpose I intended very well. Your name, and the original, remain in my patterns dialogue.

I have yet to do anything substantial with Ascension's trees technique, but I continue to think my trees need a little help, so I will probably do some work with his instructions in front of me.

You see that blueish-green area in the NE that kind of runs into the forest, that's supposed to be marsh/swamp. I am still very unhappy with that, but that's the best I've come up with so far. The forest is actually covering a great deal of it, as well. To me, this runs against the point of cartography, which is to convey information, not obscure it. Unless I can figure something out, or one of you can suggest something, I may end up tearing down that part of the forest.



Any and all suggetstions/observations are welcome (read 'needed'), and will be considered in a less-than-timely manner. Thanks.

P.S. The roads and buildings are not in a finished state, I keep the roads up as guides until I figure out what I'm going to do with them. Speaking of buildings, the bevel function generates a dark side on the SE. The only way I've thought of to fix it is to rotate the entire picture 180, bevel, and rotate back. Anyone have anything better?

Good update. One thing you may try to do with this scale so you can maintain your swamp look (I don't really have any ideas about how to make the swamp part itself though) where the trees are is to remove the trees as a amorphous blob(I don't mean that in a bad way) and put down individual trees in a more painterly style. This will let you have some "show through" to the ground below.

Another thing, the ground texture seems to be a bit much. Perhaps have several different textures and hide/show them via the use of a layer mask (each one of course). Right now, the texture is just to repeating for my tastes.

You might also want to think about using a layer mask to "create" your river and have it cover all or more of the layer itself. Then use the layer mask to blur the edges (at specific places if you want) to define the shape of the river. This will let you get some "bleed" through between the swamp and river without such hard lines.

I rather like this start you have...looking forward to seeing more. If you need more on Layer Masks in GIMP, check out my short tutorial via the link in my sig.