Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    • CommentAuthorT6A5
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    An issue that I have encountered when working with the modern political mapping style from the 2010 annual is that sometimes, the bitmap-filled map contours I draw don't *entirely* jive with my vision for what the place should look like. Usually this problem is solved by deleting the contour, and redrawing it, but does anyone know if there is a way to get a new bitmap fill in an existing shape without having to redraw it?

    Thanks!
    •  
      CommentAuthorMonsen
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    Just use Change Properties on it (left toolbars), and choose the fill you want.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    Hi T6A5 :)

    If you click the top paint can button on the left (Change Properties), and then click the shape(s) you want to change, and then right click and click do it, you will find that you can select any of the fills currently loaded into the map you are drawing.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    Darn it, Remy! LOL!

    Ninja warrior strikes again :P
    • CommentAuthorT6A5
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    I tried doing that, but because it is mountains I'm working with, I'm limited to bitmaps for low and high mountains, and if neither of them result in what I'm looking for, I have to generate an entirely new shape. I've noted that the style of bitmap that seems to be somewhat linked to the actual shape generated - for example, if I start with a mountains low fill, change it to something else, and then try changing back, I get the exact same fill as before. If I try to resize the contour, and then scale it back to the original size, the fill remains the same as well. What I'm wondering is if there is any way to force the program to generate a fill that is in the existing style (high or low mountains), but entirely new and not linked to the contour I've already drawn.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    I'm not really following you...

    Have you got a screen shot or two you can show us?
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    If its the shape of a bitmap, you can use the node tools on the left side to move the edges around. And make sure snap is always off when making areas of bitmap fills.
    • CommentAuthorT6A5
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018 edited
     
    Yes, I do have screenshots. So I've got a flat landmass, but decide that I want the river here running through a valley. I place down a mountains, low contour, that doesn't really work because it looks like the river is running through the hill itself. I go to edit properties, and replace the mountains, low fill with a mountains, high fill. This also doesn't work. So I go back to edit properties, and swap the high fill back for the low fill, but the bitmap that is generated is identical to the one that was there when I first created the contour. What I'm trying to see is if there is any way to force CC3 to generate a new fill in one of these styles, without having to create a new contour.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    Ooooh. I see now - even though I don't have that annual.

    I think that perhaps the better idea may be to draw two sausage shaped shapes either side of the river instead of all the way right underneath it?

    While I'm looking at it, the scale of that fill is a little on the large side. Those squarish things are pixels. You might get a better all round effect if you half the scale of the fill as well.
  1.  
    I get what you are wanting. Clcik (right click?) on the fill box in the top right, navigate the fill styles until you get to the mountain fill style you used, you can change the scale and offset etc through this dialog box. Does that help?

    (I don't think the technique you are using is going to work, but...)
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    and the answer to your question is no, CC3 doesn't make fills, it only uses what is available to it.

    Here are a few facts that might be of some help to you

    The shape you draw on the map is a vector polygon shape. Unless it is hollow it will contain either the fill associated with the particular drawing tool you are using, or the fill you have selected if you are using a primitive shape (like a circle or rectangle) and not one of the tools.

    Whatever bitmap or solid fill the polygon contains can be exchanged for another using the Change Properties tool - as previously described by Monsen and myself. If, however, you then decide to delete that shape and draw it again using the same tool as before, it will appear once again with the fill associated with that drawing tool, and not the new one you changed the deleted shape to contain.

    If you can't find a fill to suit your taste when looking through the Change Properties drop down list of fills, then bitmap fills from other styles can be loaded into the map using Tools/Import bitmap fill styles, from the menu, and locating the folder within the Bitmaps folder where the fills you want are located.
    • CommentAuthorScottA
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    I think Sue has a good idea in drawing polygons on either side of your river instead of one large one beneath it. This way you'll have a valley of sorts between your mountain fills.

    Generally, fills in CC3+ are oriented in one direction, and even if you draw a polygon with a fill and then rotate that polygon, the fill will orientate back to its original direction (although the polygon will be in a rotated position). There are ways around this using the shaded Shaded Polygon and EDITSHADING commands, however.
    • CommentAuthorT6A5
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2018
     
    Thanks for the info, guys. I'll definitely keep this in mind. Sue, you were right about the scale of the fill being large. I ended up decreasing the scale by more than half (100 to 45), and although it'll be a pain in the rear to replace all the roads, rivers and railways I've drawn, the size of each individual mountain shape does seem a lot more true to lie, so thanks for the advice! I appreciate it.