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
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    Yeah, Crater Lake is a collapsed volcanic cone.

    I'll just say, I concur with Quenten.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    Mike - The Rift Valley? I loved that bit of my geography lessons at school. It goes a lot further south than that. A fascinating article though - thank you very much :D

    Jim - I wondered why there was a huge island in the middle of it. That must be the remains of the volcanic plug, then? And thank you! :)
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    As far as I know. Its one of those huge volcanoes from ancient times. Thats the remains of the cone, and the crater is the size of the original volcano.

    You're welcome.
    • CommentAuthorjslayton
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    Wizard island (that thing in the middle of Crater Lake) is the same volcano growing up through its old corpse. It's like Tholos Naftilos, Anak Krakatau, or the little cone in the Mt St Helens crater (to name a very few examples). When a volcano blows its top, that's just another day at the office, so to speak. The magma chamber's still down there and still bubbling up fresh material. The volcano may well reform over time and might possibly blow again.

    In an impact crater, the central rebound structure (if the crater's large enough) is a one-time thing formed during the impact. A fun thing about impact craters is that their structure varies somewhat with their size. Smallish craters are simple (one rim wall), larger craters start to get a rebound mountain in the middle, larger still gets a ring of mountains inside the rim, and larger still starts to end up as a little rim or two of mountains over a flat plain far away from the central cone (which may or may not still be visible through the lava). We don't see the latter two kinds very often here on Earth because they tend to cause significant extinction events and will be very eroded by now.

    Another fun thing about impact craters is that they are affected by the planet's gravity and (especially) atmosphere. The statistics of shapes for asteroid craters are somewhat different from lunar craters, which are different from Martian craters, which are different from craters here on Earth. Smallish craters are also impacted by local conditions (Meteor Crater in Arizona, for example, is generally square due to how the underlying rock is jointed).
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    Oh, right! I see now :)

    Thank you for the explanation, Joe. I hadn't realised it was an active volcano. We only have extinct ones in the UK, so I'm used to being told that this or that land form is the remains of a volcanic plug or igneous intrusion exposed by erosion.

    I guessed that craters must be all kinds of shapes and sizes, and that's an interesting fact about them being affected by gravity though it does make a lot of sense. I think I will stick with traditional round ones without the central rebound because it's what people expect to see on a map.

    Same with geysers. I didn't realise that you could have geysers that weren't generated thermally by igneous activity. There are cold water geysers and sea geysers powered by pressure created by bottlenecks in the rock formations and even in one case by a natural chemical reaction. By that reckoning we actually have a collection of local sea geysers here on the British Isle of Portland, where the caves in the cliff face have what we call 'blow holes' that frequently gush high pressure sea water in windy conditions when the tide is right. I now know that these are called sea geysers.

    All of my map geysers are going to be thermal, though, since that's what people expect to see on a map when they think of geysers.
    • CommentAuthorjslayton
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020 edited
     
    I don't recommend looking for pictures of Fly Geyser in Nevada. It will ruin your idea of geysers. Technically, it's artificial and it's more of a hot springs terrace than a geyser, but it's a weird looking thing anyhow.

    Speaking of weird-looking, appending the word "cartoon" to an image search for inspiration is often useful. The cartoon versions of things tend to describe what lots of people think of when they think of a particular structure. As you're well aware, an artist generally tries to capture the essence of the thing rather than be a photograph of the thing and cartoonists tend to have the lowest line budget of all.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    Joe! LOL!

    You know its a guaranteed thing that when you tell a person not to do something, they will do it anyway just to find out what's so wrong! (Unless its obviously that its going to be detrimental to a person's health)

    You're right. It's totally ruined my vision of geysers!

    You're also spot on about carton artists. They have to play to popular belief systems even more than people who make map art. Its because we deal in a language of symbolism, and a symbol can only be a good symbol if it looks exactly like the majority of mappers think it should.
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    In general, impact craters where the impactor destroys itself in the event tend to be round, regardless of the angle of impact (except for near-grazing angles to the surface, when they can be more elongated). Meteor Crater in Arizona is unusual in being more angular, but as noted this is due to the underlying rock structure, and the fact this was a minor, low-velocity event.

    I think you're right to stick with your instincts of simple, round craters Sue. It's easy enough to add a rescaled mountain symbol in the crater's middle if a central peak's needed, after all, or even a ring.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2020
     
    Thank you, Wyvern! :)

    When I watch these cheap sci-fi movies where the comet ploughs a gouge right across the surface of a continent and then turns a nice sharp angle so as to bury itself neatly in the crust instead of bouncing back out to space on a tangent like it should do, I always have to smile. That is one of the reasons I never do teardrop shaped craters. Extremely thin elliptical, maybe, but that would be a gouge or a scar where it bounced off again, rather than a crater. I wonder if there was ever a meteor that bounced several times like a skimming stone - one coming in at too much of an angle to pierce the crust, and at to low a speed to escape the gravitational field? Sort of like a mega gigantic plane crash.
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeMay 10th 2020 edited
     
    Even the expensive science-fiction movies routinely ignore the physics of cosmic impacts Sue!

    For Earth impacts where the incoming body is an orbiting member of the Solar System, the atmospheric entry velocity must be between approximately 11 and 72 km/sec. The Meteor Crater impact probably still had a velocity of between about 13 and 20 km/sec when it hit, for instance, so the slowing effect of the atmosphere helps a bit, but only for smaller, lower-velocity events. For a very low approach angle, and assuming its mass and velocity allowed, it would be more likely the object would skip off the atmosphere than the surface, assuming it wasn't large enough to ignore the effects of the atmosphere entirely (if it had a mass above roughly 100,000 tonnes).

    Only about 5% of known craters on the Moon, Mars and Venus have an elliptical shape. Modelling suggests this is more likely with lower angle events (less than roughly 30° from the horizontal), and is heavily dependent on the size of the impacting body (bigger is better for an elliptical crater outcome), its velocity (lower is better) and the strength of the surface materials (higher strengths are better) where it hits.

    There are crater chains known on various Solar System bodies - lines of at least three craters in close relative proximity to one another. Since Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 became gravitationally disrupted in 1992 and hit Jupiter in a series of atmospheric impacts there in 1994, this has become the preferred explanation for these features. However, some seem to have been created by material cast out from a larger impact some way off, or volcanic activity, instead. The skipping-stone impactor concept seems unlikely in this case, but you never know ;)

    AS12-51-7485_(21515203278).jpg

    This one's a nice example, and I love the original name - the Davy Chain (because it's in a small crater in the side of the slightly bigger lunar crater named after British physicist Sir Humphrey Davy, not because someone thought it sounded nicely like "daisy chain" after all :( ). It's now more correctly called the Catena Davy, because Latin's posher than English... The shot was taken by the Apollo 12 crew in orbit around the Moon in 1969, available via Wikimedia Commons.

    Pit crater chains, again found on a number of Solar System planets, are where a line of circular to elliptical craters have apparently coalesced into a linear trough. These though are thought to be down to local geological processes (varying by whichever body they happen to be on) causing surface collapses of different kinds which have only a superficial similarity otherwise.
  1.  
    Since the topic seems to be impact craters at the moment I was wondering if you could help me with a map idea I have. It’s a circular bay created by an impact crater a bit inland of a 300′ tall sea cliff. I see the crater rim intersecting the cliff face just deeply enough to provide a channel to the sea. How big would the crater have to be to have a floor below sea level (say by 50′ making it 350′ deep)?
    • CommentAuthorthehawk
    • CommentTimeMay 10th 2020
     
    I've been reading some about this one lately: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 10th 2020
     
    There was an attempt to find the meteor that created Meteor Crater. Unfortunately the guy looking for iron chunks didn't find any. That was about last mid-century. Its now protected.

    Last time I read anything on this particular crater is it may not have been particularly solid, and mostly vaporized and/or fell apart at impact.

    There are supposedly small bits of it for some distance outside the crater, but that entire area is protected by law.
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 10th 2020
     
    Posted By: thehawkI've been reading some about this one lately: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater


    The one that gave the later part of the Jurassic Period a very bad year or so.
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2020 edited
     
    Dalton: I'd recommend making the crater whatever size seems best to you; there's no hard and fast rule about crater sizes. From your description, I'd suggest trying different sizes and distances to the coast to see what best fits to give the narrow channel you need. A fracture in the crater rim connecting with a local line of weakness in the crustal rocks would work equally as well, so you don't necessarily need the two edge lines to intersect.

    Meteor Crater/Canyon Diablo Meteorites: A substantial number of pieces of the Meteor Crater impactor have survived, known as the Canyon Diablo meteorites. The larger pieces, held by museums now, and weighing between 19 and 639 kg each, total over 3.3 tonnes. Very many smaller pieces (that is, less than 19 kg) exist too, and there are likely still lots scattered over the countryside near (but outside) the crater rim. From these, it's clear the original impactor was largely composed of solid nickel-iron, technically an octahedrite meteorite. Part of it will have vaporised during its atmospheric flight, and the bulk of the rest when it hit, so what's left now are just tiny remnants!

    Chicxulub Crater: It certainly didn't help at the end of the Cretaceous period, though the massive outpourings of lava that created the Deccan Traps in India before and after it happened may have been important too. Many unknowns remain regarding the effects on the world overall from both events. The late Jurassic extinctions weren't anything like so dramatic, and there don't seem to have been any such significant geological events by contrast (sorry Jim :) ).
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2020
     
    I meant the K-T boundary... tired as usual.
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeMay 12th 2020
     
    Ah, what's 80 million years between friends? I'm always losing time :)
    • CommentAuthorkevbeck43
    • CommentTimeMay 12th 2020
     
    WOW! This style looks really, really exciting. Is this for ProFantasy or for some other project? I hope its for us. :)
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 12th 2020
     
    Thank you! :D

    It's for the July issue of this year's Cartographer's Annual.
  2.  
    OMG July so excited! can't wait to take a break from doing building interiors and have some fun with an overland map!
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 24th 2020
     
    Well I hope I don't let you all down :)

    I have been wrestling with the tricky issue of colour schemes all day every day for the last fortnight. You would be surprised just how much of a problem it is if the grass isn't just exactly the right shade of green on the hills and the mountains and the mountain background and the dry grass and the normal grass! And that's just the green bits. LOL!

    This is my test site as it stands right now. As you can see there are still no settlements, but at least I think I have the green-orange transition worked out and the mountain backgrounds and the colours of the mountains seem to be working ok... until I go and change something else and upset it all over again.
      Untitled.jpg
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 24th 2020
     
    Oh.

    I've just realised by looking at that snapshot that I've completely forgotten to do anything about the dry hills.

    (I think I'm not sleeping very well in this heat!)
    • CommentAuthorArcwynd
    • CommentTimeMay 26th 2020
     
    The whole of that image is awe inspiring. I imagine the space cartographers would also love it.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 27th 2020
     
    Thank you, Arcwynd.

    Combined with the arid mountains and hills I guess it could be used as a moonscape set, though I hadn't thought of it that way until you suggested it :)
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 27th 2020
     
    Very much so, I could use those crater symbols to make asteroids and moons for my Traveller site.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 27th 2020
     
    It's probably just as well that there are 3 of them :)
    • CommentAuthormike robel
    • CommentTimeMay 27th 2020
     
    I really like the texture of the plains.
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTimeMay 27th 2020
     
    The one on the left, I just realized, with a bit of this and that, it could resemble Crater Lake. I need to put craters on Crestar.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeMay 28th 2020
     
    Mike - that's about five textures the same but different colours. And thanks :)

    Jim - It's a reasonably large symbol, so it might be ok. That's the default symbol size on show.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    This is the first example map for "Spectrum Overland - part 1" as it will appear in the July issue of this year's Cartographer's Annual. I believe Ralf is doing a second example map if he has time, and there will be more symbols and fills in part 2, due out in September this year.
      Annual Spectrum Overland - example 1 (1000).jpg
    •  
      CommentAuthorMonsen
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    Looks lovely. Can't wait to try it out in a map.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    Thanks Remy :D
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    Grown so used to closely examining individual elements of this package that it seems very strange to suddenly see an entire map in the style! THIS IS NOT A COMPLAINT, YOU UNDERSTAND!!! :D
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    Thank you, Wyvern! :D
    • CommentAuthormike robel
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    Looks Great Sue!
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2020
     
    Thanks Mike :D
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2020
     
    Anyone with a Facebook account can watch Ralf doing a map in the new style in about 15 minutes if you go to the PF FB page. Or if you miss it the recorded version will be available on YouTube a short time later.
  3.  
    Sue, that bit from here made me look at contrast between sea & land in a whole new way. I really see it in that last image you've posted. It makes for a much more interesting map and easy for the eye to take in. It's amazing what subtle things can do for inherently complex images, simplifying them in a way (a good way!).
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2020
     
    Thank you! :)

    I saw that Daisho had made a comment, but I wasn't able to respond to him!

    If you read this, Daisho - thank you, and you're welcome :)
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    Worth saying I think that the first part of this wonderful new overland style has just been released into the wild earlier today, via the July issue of the Cartographer's Annual.

    Well done, Sue!
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    Thank you very much, Wyvern :)

    There are certainly the first few maps appearing on the FB Group page today, so I guess it's out of the box now! LOL!

    More to come in part 2.

    I will be running a poll on the FB Group page to see what people really want in part 2, bearing in mind that there is a time limit and not all suggestions will make it through.

    For those who don't like FB I can take suggestions here as well.
    • CommentAuthorWyvern
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    You're welcome Sue!

    I think we covered some items among the many pages of this topic which haven't been included as yet - spring-blossom trees spring to mind, for instance. But of course I'm never going to be able to find those quickly now, so...

    Looking through the symbols so far, maybe some glaciers would be useful - on the lines of snow "dunes", perhaps - to work for the edges of ice-caps, for example, or as free-standing objects in their own right.

    Also a cave mouth that could be fitted to a hill or mountain symbol (how else will JimP show where his dungeons are?!).

    Something I've found handy elsewhere is a loose plume of smoke, like the geyser or volcano one, but not attached to a ground object, so it can be used for features like a fumarole halfway up a mountain, or a patch of burning/smoking land.

    With structures, maybe some more rustic buildings would be useful, possibly as separate entities, or small groups (suitable for hamlets or farms, say, or as a scattered shanty-town outside a more formal settlement). Then a temple or two, and/or a shrine (small temple, or some obviously unusual object, such as a standing stone or more than one) would be good.

    A ship or two would add colour to the seas and lakes, and perhaps a sea-monster or dragon or two (so covering sea and land) similarly.

    First thoughts only here, and I'm sure there'll be lists longer than anyone would have thought possible from others very soon ;D
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuenten
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    Desert stuff - oases, mesas, desert vegetation (cactus, prickly bushes and grass tufts). Also red desert symbols (go, Aussie, go), tents and yurts.
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuenten
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    Building stuff: temples, mansions, inns and other single buildings. Ruins, More fort types (eg like Schley) and prehistoric stuff - menhirs, tombs and stone/wooden circles (I believe they have 1 or 2 of these in the UK, I may be wrong). Some meditrranean (flat roofed, with vc options) and oriental (domes, minarets - perhaps as separate to add on, and pagoda like stuff). Finally, Pacific Island/Maori type buildings - on stilts with thatched roofs.
    Vegetation - apart from desert stuff above, need wetland type plants/bushes, willows and Mangroves - please please the latter. Also jungle type stuff, including palm trees and exotic colourful trees.
    We do have top down stuff in CSUAC, but no perspective type stuff of jungle stuff except for palm trees.

    And GUM Trees and Wattle trees :D I'll post photos in the FB page.

    Finally - Uluru
    •  
      CommentAuthorMedio
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    I like this style as CC3+ needed a good digital style which filled a spot among more cartographic or cartoonish ones, like Schey´s. I think it will become a classic. Expecting for more symbols and fills for August!

    By the way, one interesting way of getting good Annuals could be precisely that. Getting annuals favourites and expanding them, most of them would become even better. I understand the direction is creating new styles which is a trademark for Campaign Cartographer but from time to time (let´s say one month per Annual) a revisit for old, popular styles would be good (also a reason to buy that missing Annual), specially if they get new exciting features. Just an opinion.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTime7 days ago
     
    Thank you, all, for your suggestions so far :)

    I will add them to the list over at the FB group when I start it on Saturday morning. I can see it's going to be a long list, but it will also be a poll, so people can tick the boxes beside the things they also want and I get a better idea of which things are more urgently required than others and prioritise my work that way.
    • CommentAuthorShessar
    • CommentTime6 days ago
     
    This is a beautiful set Sue and I already have plans for using it in a future map. Thank you for all that you do!

    I do have a request - a few types of dead deciduous trees, both with and without snow. :)
    • CommentAuthorJimP
    • CommentTime6 days ago
     
    Posted By: ShessarThis is a beautiful set Sue and I already have plans for using it in a future map. Thank you for all that you do!

    I do have a request - a few types of dead deciduous trees, both with and without snow. :)


    Yes, me as well.
  4.  
    Woot! Just bought the annual specifically for this style, gonna start work on a map tonight.