Moderator: Cartographers
Raskholnikov wrote:LOL ...women in burkhas, harems, eunuchs, camels, oil rigs, swirling dervishes, mad ayatollahs.. ya I get the picture. Nah, don't think so
Thank you RJ, Yes I have also been concerned with the very same questions that you are posing. And oh, I am so glad to hear some thoughtful dialog seeping into this conversation. My next update will address this issue. From the looks of my solution, I think it will be worked out fine.RjBeals wrote:
cool looking map, like a chinese checkers game board sort of. Nice icons also. But personally, It's very hard to see what connects. The connecting lines are too muted in the background. It looks like a sea of icons, and without BOB I would have no idea where to attack. Especialy along the sides of the map, where the bg is darker.
looking back, it seems this is the concern among more than just me.
Please check my layout. If I have made any mistakes, will you show as you did before with the red ink corrections.Raskholnikov wrote:Are you sure? Did you check the map at the top of this post? B5 is a battle, not even a city.
Do you mean give the kingdoms a relief ? I went out of my way when coloring and shading them, to not give them relief. I will try a version to see if it is better that way or not.RjBeals wrote:i prefer the 2nd one - much better. Since at first glance, this reminds me of a board game, why not take it one step further and put a low hard bevel on the land regions, giving them the appearance of a second layer? Might look cool.
Raskholnikov wrote:I would like to propose a map depicting the history of the Islamic Caliphate at its height, in 800 AD.
The artistic direction I'd like to take this is to re-create the famous early Islamic map of the Middle East and Europe drawn from an Arabic view of the world
I would again suggest that the SMALL map be worked on first. Just because ti all fits on the large, does not mean anything for the small.
natty_dread wrote:I would again suggest that the SMALL map be worked on first. Just because ti all fits on the large, does not mean anything for the small.
I respectfully disagree. For my first map, I started from small, and in the middle of development I had to redo all the graphics from scratch, to get a decent large version. It's a lot easier to shrink a large image to small size without losing image quality, than the other way around. When you enlarge an image, there is always pixelation. And that's not good.
If you are worried about things not fitting on small version, you can always view your large version at 75% zoom as a test. If everything looks ok at 75%, then you're OK.
natty_dread wrote:I would again suggest that the SMALL map be worked on first. Just because ti all fits on the large, does not mean anything for the small.
I respectfully disagree. For my first map, I started from small, and in the middle of development I had to redo all the graphics from scratch, to get a decent large version. It's a lot easier to shrink a large image to small size without losing image quality, than the other way around. When you enlarge an image, there is always pixelation. And that's not good.
If you are worried about things not fitting on small version, you can always view your large version at 75% zoom as a test. If everything looks ok at 75%, then you're OK.
natty_dread wrote:You're missing a point here... Why start from small, when you can just as easily view your large image at 75% zoom to ensure everything will fit in the small version?
WM,WidowMakers wrote:natty_dread wrote:I would again suggest that the SMALL map be worked on first. Just because ti all fits on the large, does not mean anything for the small.
I respectfully disagree. For my first map, I started from small, and in the middle of development I had to redo all the graphics from scratch, to get a decent large version. It's a lot easier to shrink a large image to small size without losing image quality, than the other way around. When you enlarge an image, there is always pixelation. And that's not good.
If you are worried about things not fitting on small version, you can always view your large version at 75% zoom as a test. If everything looks ok at 75%, then you're OK.
Well I have started from the small map on all my projects. You just need to know how to build the map right to make it work. Plus I did not say complete the map 100% then make the LARGE. I said make sure the small works.
There are many potential issues with text, roads, icons and overlapping things on the small map. Plus legibility could also be an issue. I am not saying they need to do it. I am just saying that from experience, it works the best for me and has prevented many issues from coming up. Poker club, Arms race, Draknor, Conquerman, The HIVE, Montreal, etc all started small to make the stuff fit.natty_dread wrote:You're missing a point here... Why start from small, when you can just as easily view your large image at 75% zoom to ensure everything will fit in the small version?
Not everything is the same. The 88's do not scale. If the font they used does not scale well either (i.e. it is hard to read when shrunk) it might need to be kept larger. Then with non-scaling 88's and adjusted text, the borders, names and other vital info might not fit. Better to be safe than sorry.
There is a lot on this map. There could be space issues. that is all I am saying.
WM
Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas
Users browsing this forum: No registered users