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.
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeNov 16th 2019
     
    Zounds ! Sue and Wyvern, thanks for all this work !
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 16th 2019
     
    Oh I enjoy it! Nothing better than a tangled mystery to sort out. Much more interesting than watching TV (not that I have one of those anyway). This is fantasy, but at the same time its also very real. I hadn't even heard of the Ferraris map until just a couple of weeks ago, but now I think it's one of the most beautiful maps ever created.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMonsen
    • CommentTimeNov 16th 2019
     
    It is interesting to see how you deconstruct the map, finding errors in keys, and figuring everything out. Sometimes I wonder if you pay this thing far more attention that the museum ever did :)
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 16th 2019 edited
     
    Oh no I think they probably did. It's just that the variation between different cartographers can be greater than the variation between different types of fill, and then on top of that you have as many different ideas as there are cartographers about what exactly constitutes the ideal green. The secret of identifying the fills and deciding whether two swatches are essentially the same or different lies in totally ignoring the colour and looking at the shape and form of the little ink marks. As Wyvern pointed out earlier these little marks are not very far removed from our own modern day OS map symbols, and I am very familiar with those. Maybe this is what makes it easy for me to recognise the patterns I'm looking at as their raw hand-drawn ancestors? I don't know. But I do know that both sets of legend makers tried really hard to get it right, or the results would have been very much more incomplete and riddled with far more errors than they are.
  1.  
    Sue,

    Good analysis, in my view, so far.

    The moment I first saw the Ferraris map, I was astounded by its beauty. No other map "does it" for me, which is why I asked for someone to look at the style. Actually, I'd first asked for it about 10 years ago, but none took it up.

    One thing that folks need to keep in mind is that the different terrains, which we have been referring to as fills, would be significant in the minds of the cartographers, but more importantly for the military leaders who used the maps in their planning. Certain types of wet grounds would take infantry, possibly cavalry, but not the weight of artillery, and as it got progressively "wetter" eventually it would be useless for even infantry to try to cross. This would be intimately known by the professionals of the age, probably to the point of knowing the relative water content based on the variation of the term used.

    Of course, water would not be the only variable they considered, but also the thickness of the undergrowth, the difficulty of getting through leafy foliage, etc. The same applies to the variations of the roads, especially when it comes to sunken roads as they were ready-made cover and/or concealment, although they did not tend to fight from such locations, they were useful in other ways.

    Basically, my point is that from the wargamer/end-user perspective, the more variations available, the more popular a style it will be.

    Where you can logically reduce the number of fills to work on, thus reducing your workload, is great, but where there may be some real distinctions at the wargaming and historical military level, such distinctions will make a difference.

    I cannot wait to purchase this annual, literally. I won't be using any other styles for a long time to come.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 16th 2019 edited
     
    Thank you :)

    I can understand the concern about having sufficient fills to properly illustrate the ground as it is, but I assure you that there will be just as many as are actually in the map. In fact I've discovered one about an hour ago that is definitely not in either of the two legends. I've called it Heath scrub. It's not just an area that someone forgot to paint green under the tree symbols. If you look at the ground you can see that it's definitely heath symbols, and that the colour of it is the same as the other heath swatch I've taken. And those are trees very similar in format to the trees of the fill that Wyvern and I decided to call Woodland scrub (or similar) for now.

    Key - MINE - Heath scrub.png

    I'm hoping to find more little gems like this one. Don't know if this is weird, but I get a kick out of discovering stuff that hundreds of other people have missed through the years.
  2.  
    Sue,

    I've seen that one on a few of the other map sections.

    One of the things that returns to my mind as I view the map is the fact that that a house, depicted as an individual dwelling, had someone living in it when the surveyors went through the area. One could have followed the map and found and met each of the persons or families living in the specific buildings drawn on the map.

    Nowadays, most maps, beyond Google Street View which isn't technically a map at all, only show generalizations. Although, most cities do have a map of their environs, complete with the individual houses and buildings, but those are rarely seen by the public. I used to have a 12' x 12' map of Shreveport, Louisana on my wall, when I lived there. I could see the house I lived in as an individual building, along with all of the other houses and apartments. It was really something.
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuenten
    • CommentTimeNov 16th 2019
     
    This whole project is like assembling a Google Earth view, bit by bit. It is SO exciting. Roll on 2020
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Posted By: khornishmanSue,

    I've seen that one on a few of the other map sections.

    One of the things that returns to my mind as I view the map is the fact that that a house, depicted as an individual dwelling, had someone living in it when the surveyors went through the area. One could have followed the map and found and met each of the persons or families living in the specific buildings drawn on the map.

    Nowadays, most maps, beyond Google Street View which isn't technically a map at all, only show generalizations. Although, most cities do have a map of their environs, complete with the individual houses and buildings, but those are rarely seen by the public. I used to have a 12' x 12' map of Shreveport, Louisana on my wall, when I lived there. I could see the house I lived in as an individual building, along with all of the other houses and apartments. It was really something.

    Oh. LOL! Then I will just take it as a personal discovery that both the sets of Legend makers seem to have overlooked ;) Are there any others you've seen that don't appear in either of them? I got up to map 33 before I had to break off last night to make sure I wasn't starting to glaze over. Looking at these maps is oddly addictive, but at the same time it's like reading an interesting but incredibly long novel. You have to take a break and resume a while later :)

    For me the beauty of the map is the little quirks of hand that happen in any hand drawn map. The personality of the draughtsmen (I really doubt that any women were involved at that point in history). Even if the joins between sections done by different people weren't so obvious by varying degrees of ageing and wear, it would still be pretty obvious to me when I cross from one map-maker's realm into another by the style of the marks. Here there is one who is fastidiously careful to make his marks as similar and correct as possible, and here there is one who is perhaps a little bored. His marks are looser and less disciplined, as if he is drawing at great speed and just wants to get this bit finished and go home. And then there is the artist right next door to that, where every mark is unique and deliberately variable despite his obviously superior skill - the man who takes a joy in this work and treats it more like a very fine ink and wash master class than a map.

    Google street view has nothing on the Ferraris map, and I'm afraid that I have looked at so many OS maps over the years I spent working in a county planning department that I just find them cold and a bit boring after the first 5 minutes or so. They are tools, not works of art.

    Posted By: QuentenThis whole project is like assembling a Google Earth view, bit by bit. It is SO exciting. Roll on 2020

    I'm glad you are enjoying it so much :)
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    And I found a much better depiction of "Marsh" than the black squiggly things that appear in the existing legends. You can actually see what it is in this one. I should be able to make a nice texture now I understand the black squiggles are meant to be the mud at the margin between plant and water.

    Key - MINE - marsh.png
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Sue, at the risk of distracting too much from the Ferraris mapping, it's interesting the OS:Ferraris symbol similarities are chiefly with those from the more modern OS maps. The earlier printed OS maps (the 25 inch to the mile and 6 inch to the mile maps from the 1840s to the 1950s, for instance) had a much greater range of vegetation schemes and drawings than is now the case, to the point of identifying certain specific tree species. This National Library of Scotland page shows samples of the printing stamps used on the larger-scale 1/500, 1/2500 and 6 inch = 1/10,560 maps, the original page dated to 1886 (if nothing else proving that repeating fill patterns are not merely a modern problem!). This PDF from the groundsure.com site has a handy comparison between the illustrated feature symbols used on the "County" (loosely the 1840s-1950s) and "National Grid" (roughly the 1940s onwards) OS map series' which helps illustrate the changes better.

    Of course, even the earlier the OS maps were printed, not hand-drawn, hence their "mechanical" appearance that you found so off-putting.

    Sadly, you're right about few to no women being involved in cartographical drawing prior to the Second World War in Britain. This page has some notes (see especially item 10 towards the foot of the page for OS wartime cartographers).

    Good to see you've been making further progress identifying and clarifying others of the fill/potential fill styles from Ferraris. I had wondered what those Marsh features were - I'd thought small meandering channels rather than ponds though.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Oh thank you very much!

    I've been looking for some better reference material to figure out just how I'm finding these symbols so familiar. At first glance they don't look anything alike, but if you analyse the lines as a set of numbers and directions (3 vertical, one horizontal squiggle, for example) they are clearly related. I did some more reading since I inferred that the OS might have been strongly influenced by the Ferraris map, and I've discovered that the UK defence forces started surveying the UK a few decades before the Ferraris map following 'the uprising' in Scotland. So maybe what these maps convey is more about the fashion of the day than either being triggered by the other.

    I don't dislike machine printed maps. They are just less interesting than hand drawn ones. I know that by creating this new CC3 style I am basically making something much less beautiful than the Ferraris map, but I hope it will be useful for people who would like to make maps in a similar style.

    Sexism in the employment sector, sadly, was tackled too late for me to be able to follow my initial dream of becoming an OS cartographer. Ironically I came across a chance to join in later life and applied, only to be rejected because I was 2 months over the upper age limit. That's the government for you - one law for us ordinary civilians, quite a different one for the civil services.

    I think the reason that particular sample of marsh was so clear was because the other samples were taken of patches of marsh where the cartographer had applied a much smaller scale to the drawing of the texture. The person left with the job of painting it then had little choice but to try and squash all the required colours into a much tinier space, which usually results in something of a jumble - hence the strange black squiggles. If you mix blue with brown you get black. I don't think those other marshes were ever intended to be so dark. It's just that they were too tiny for the inks not to mix.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Here's a texture that by its position and colour should really be classified as Salt marsh. Its from the drowned village of saeftinghe, which was built on a polder that was flooded and reclaimed by the sea in 1584 - 200 years before the Ferraris map. If you do an image search for saeftinghe today the area is now very clearly salt marsh, but the texture is different here to the salt marsh texture that occurs almost everywhere else there is salt marsh. I'm wondering if this is just a quirk of the particular cartographer who did this piece, or if the difference is significant - land lost to the sea perhaps?

    The usual form of the salt marsh is on the left, with this new texture on the right.

    Key - MINE - salt marsh2.png Key - MINE - Salt marsh 2.png
  3.  
    Sue,

    That fill is probably an intermission between changes in water saturation/density at the time the map was done. Look at this map snippet here, from the Sluys #23 section.
      ferraris3fills.png
  4.  
    Also, this one.
      ferraris3fills2.png
    • CommentAuthorkhornishman
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Looking along the coast, there's quite a lot of the fill on the right, from your post.

    The "usual" salt marsh looks to be a lot easier to draw, than the far more numerous squiggles which are at varying, but much higher densities than the tufts of the marsh grass as shown.
  5.  
    However, looking other areas on nearby sections or even the same section, it may be that the squiggles on the right are "more wet," but not yet marshy. Looking at the pond/lake in the snippet here, we see the same fill in what would likely be lower lying ground with a higher water saturation.
      ferraris3fills3.png
    • CommentAuthorkhornishman
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Looking at this snippet, which is the zoomy map's view of sections #44 and #45, the variation may well be due to the cartographers, but also looking at the mix of fills, I'm not 100% sure. You can clearly see the nearly-horizontal divide of the different sections, with a significant variation in the fill used, but that variation extends as you go south, only, so that may be due to the actual ground and not merely a tired or lazy artist.
      ferraris3fills4.png
    • CommentAuthorkhornishman
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Sue,

    Also, I think you may want to just make the directional arrow for the water current a symbol and not a fill as you have it on your list. Looking at other sections of the map, the narrower tracts of water have the arrows outside the water.
      farrarisflowarrows.png
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Umm. I'm just a little confused about these varying degrees of wetness, especially since the fill on the right in my last post is only different from the pasture fill I identified earlier in terms of it being much more blue.

    Assuming that we have several degrees of wetness here, I can do them all, but what do I call them?

    And here's another one I found that I've temporarily called Mature salt marsh. So we have at least 3 different types of salt marsh - possibly more than that. I think we need to sort out a range - a way of ranking them in terms of wetness/density.
      Key - MINE - mature salt marsh.png
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Yes - I know the arrows are symbols :)

    Don't forget that the legend will show both fills and symbols ;)
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    I think I need to sit down with just the marshy bits in front of me and work out a scale of wetness, then figure out what to call them all.
    • CommentAuthorkhornishman
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Sue,

    You asked if I had any other fills that we've not already identified. Here is a section of Ghent. Notice the variance in how some of the buildings with property are shown. Even the gardens look very different if they are in fact gardens at all. I've also indicated a different defensive work, as I think you showed a ravelin on your legend, but the one here looks to be a bastion.
      ghentfills.png
  6.  
    Posted By: LoopysueUmm. I'm just a little confused about these varying degrees of wetness, especially since the fill on the right in my last post is only different from the pasture fill I identified earlier in terms of it being much more blue.

    Assuming that we have several degrees of wetness here, I can do them all, but what do I call them?

    And here's another one I found that I've temporarily called Mature salt marsh. So we have at least 3 different types of salt marsh - possibly more than that. I think we need to sort out a range - a way of ranking them in terms of wetness/density.
      Key - MINE - mature salt marsh.png


    I'd just go with "marsh" for them all and let the customer select which one they wish to use. Perhaps just include in the notes with the annual that there's a lot of visible variation and we're speculating on what those differences might have been. It is very likely that there's something written in Dutch or perhaps even French from someone who was living about that time, who would have indicated, perhaps only in passing, the terrain, but again we'd only be guessing, ourselves.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    The defensive works will not be symbols. Most probably they will be polygons with several sheet effects - bevels, glows etc. Their exact shape, whether bastion or something else will be drawn by the mapper. It has to be that way because there is just no way that an adequate number of symbols could be created to cover all the possible shapes. To do that alone would take a couple of months in itself.

    As for the difference in building colours - I have no idea why that is. What map number is Ghent?
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Marsh discussion - The trouble is that I have to give them all unique names for the key, and the files all have to have unique names too.
  7.  
    Ghent is aka Gand #35

    Marsh 1
    Marsh 2
    Marsh 3
    etc
  8.  
    FWIW, regarding the defensive works, one symbol for each would do, being that the map maker would then rotate the symbol to suit their needs, but of course it is your call.
  9.  
    Sue,

    What do you make of the diagonal, have you already made an assessment of it? I see it in #60, but am not sure what it is supposed to represent, although it appears to be a transition between types of ground, I am wondering if it is some kind of escarpment or other unusual feature.
      ferrarisuknfill1.png
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    I think its a shadow stroke. Most of the hedges have them.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Marsh discussion - Khornishman, would you be happy with this idea: that I did all the marsh fills, but only showed one or two of them in the Legend so as not to completely drown the Legend in marshy bits?
  10.  
    Posted By: LoopysueMarsh discussion - Khornishman, would you be happy with this idea: that I did all the marsh fills, but only showed one or two of them in the Legend so as not to completely drown the Legend in marshy bits?


    I am happy just having the style upcoming. :)

    I just figured that instead of you having to further research exactly how each of the marsh fills was different, to just make them available and let the users decide what works for them.

    And to answer your question, your proposed solution would be perfectly fine with me.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    That's good :)

    I'm going to continue searching the rest of the Ferraris map for fills. I'd like to find those coppiced and mixed woodland fills and judge for myself if they really exist - bearing in mind that they both came from that second legend.
    • CommentAuthorpvernon
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019
     
    Ghent buildings - It looks like red for brick construction, and the other (brown?) is for wood construction. There may be a color for stone construction as well.
    • CommentAuthorkhornishman
    • CommentTimeNov 17th 2019 edited
     
    Sue,

    I just ran across those both, today. Somewhere towards the center-left of the map, but will look again on Monday. I've the flu and am going back to bed. :/
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019
     
    Stay in bed, Khornshman! No map is worth a person's health and wellbeing. Stay as long as you need to. Thanks for the tip off about those fills. Get well soon, but don't get up too soon :)

    Pvernon - I think the red is both stone and brick. The reason for this is that red crosses, windmills, gallows, bridges and towers are all indicated as being stone. Wooden versions of all these things are black with dark brown shading. I've no idea what the fawn buildings are. Maybe we need more information on that. For now I am concentrating on the fills.

    Continuing to search for the coppice and mixed woodland...
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019 edited
     
    Broke off the search for today to start practicing the ink shapes for the Pasture fill. This is the first attempt. I think I am doing it too carefully. More practice!

    Annual Ferraris Style.PNG

    Here is the same part of the extract for comparison.

    Annual Ferraris Style orig.PNG

    The fill I was working on is more powerfully green than the original, but I am taking all the different colour variations into account across the entire map in the hope of getting a nice average.
    • CommentAuthorScottA
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019
     
    Your marks in the fields are like quotation marks, while the ones in the original are more connected squiggles. That, of course, is all technical jargon! lol! It looks really great, however. This is going to be an exciting Annual.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019 edited
     
    I'm still working in it, Scott, but thanks :)

    That was first go at the Pasture fill, and I had a go at the Meadow fill on the right side of the map as well. I think that one is possibly a little better.

    Annual Ferraris Style2.PNG
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019 edited
     
    For the marshes and their variant appearances, maybe settle on a single fill style/colour of the commonest form (or maybe a couple if there is too much variation), and then provide some separate symbol options to add the line-drawing vegetation features separately, rather than trying to make them all part of the fill.

    Looking at the examples, while some seem to be simply "shorthand" = quicker variants for covering large areas, a few have the apparent precision of extracted items from real field-mapping surveys; that is, where someone has noticed and recorded actual variations in how the vegetation appeared when they were there (it's something we were encouraged to use when being taught field mapping techniques at university). Of course at this remove in time, it's impossible to be sure.

    As for the coppice, to my eye the coppice sample on the second key looks very like the open forest on the first. I'd have guessed mixed forest might be more likely in the hilly Ardennes area towards the SE of the mapped area, but a quick check of a few maps there has drawn a blank so far (couldn't even find any obvious areas of coniferous forest there).
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019 edited
     
    I've resolved the marsh fills and ended up with "Wet Meadow (flooded at high water)", "Salt Marsh plateau", and "Salt Marsh". I haven't found any others that are significantly different to those three, which are shown in that order below.

    Key - MINE - mature salt marsh2.png Key - MINE - Salt marsh 22.png Key - MINE - salt marsh3.png

    I was originally going to do the markings separately as symbols and not incorporate them into the fills at all, but the example map is already running a little slow because of all the bush and tree symbols. And the Ferraris style has an abundance of little trees and bushes. I can't do the hedges and lines of trees as fills, so the terrain will have to be a full texture each time to allow for them.

    I will have another look for the coppice again, now that I have satisfied myself that I can actually draw these fills with a bit of practice (they will be better than that when I'm done with them), and I've already found the coniferous forest here.

    Key - MINE - Coniferous forest2.png
    • CommentAuthorsuntzu
    • CommentTimeNov 18th 2019
     
    Hi sue what are the black dots that are on your map for example they appear under the st Denis label

    Rob
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019
     
    Hi Suntzu :) Those are footpaths from the original.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019 edited
     
    I found the exact patch of 'coppice' woodland used in the second legend in map 108 earlier this morning.

    Coppice.png

    I would be able to believe it, if only that entire section wasn't as covered with the exact same texture where you might expect to find the wooded scrubland or deciduous forest fill. I think this 'coppice' is actually this particular cartographer's interpretation of how to draw woodland in general.

    I'm going to remove that one from the legend for now.

    Still looking for the 'mixed forest'.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019 edited
     
    The example map is finished apart from the changes that will happen over time as the fills and symbols are perfected. However, the example map only contains a very small number of all the fills and symbols that will be available in the annual, so here is an update on the legend. Where the fills and symbols are named in black the image in the box has been done to at least the stage of 'first draft'. Red labels indicate work that has yet to be done.

    new key2.JPG

    Having just posted this, I realise that I have actually done the hedge and row of trees, but forgotten to add them to the key.
    • CommentAuthorJMunsonII
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019
     
    awesome! :)
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019
     
    Thank you! :)

    Hopefully it will look even better once I've replaced all the Ferraris snapshots with new fills and symbols.
  11.  
    Sue,

    I understand your reasoning on the coppice. However, coppicing was used in forests East of Brussels (Bruxelles #76) for a certainty. Check the link here https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298796547_500_years_of_coppice-with-standards_management_in_Meerdaal_Forest_Central_Belgium

    Now, the question is, should this be included in the style? For myself, I do not think it all that necessary as for any maps that I will be making will only care that it is wooded, not that it was coppiced woods. Looking at where that fill is used on the map, I am thinking the artist did mean coppice, but that may be due to the influence of the second legend and the article that went with it, being that the academics who wrote it would know about the coppiced woods (or very likely to know it).

    As for the mixed woods, I saw those on the east side of a city/town, with a river running along the southern side or even perhaps through it. I also saw the left edge of the map as I was starting to zoom out, trying to figure out its relation to the segmented map, but when I went to zoom back in, I lost it. I THINK I was somewhere in the neighborhood of map 100 or thereabouts.

    Your legend, for a first draft looks good.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019 edited
     
    Hello Khornishman! I thought you had the flu?

    Glad to see that you are on the mend - I hope.

    I have to disagree on the coppice diagnosis, since the basic shapes of the fill are the same as the mixed woodland. Its just distorted by the style of that particular cartographer. Anyway - its no longer on the key, and I agree with you about the lack of need for it in any case.

    I've found the mixed woodland. There's just that one small patch of it that I can see, but it fills a gap in the key so I will add that back in.

    Key - MINE - Mixed woodland.png
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019
     
    Well done Sue!

    If coppicing was actually shown on the maps, I'd have expected it would be a lot more common than has turned out to be the case, given the central importance of such woodlands for numerous human agricultural and tool-making practices, and relatively concentrated around the settlements because of that. Glad you'd managed to resolve it as almost certainly over-zealousness on the part of the modern authors, regardless.

    Salt Marsh Plateau's presumably salt marsh that's a bit higher/further inland than "ordinary" salt marsh?