I pasted the dead tree in there to try and decide whether to have them on the same sheet, or a separate one (as they currently are because their shadows are less intense. I have the dead tree sheet on top of the living tree sheet at the moment, because in my minds eye the dead trees show up in a forest quite noticeably.
I haven't decided yet whether to keep it that way or not... but as it is, all these trees have been pasted in a very small test site just to see what they look like, and will all be deleted when I actually get around to making a proper symbol set
I have a second test site down in the lowlands where the grass is at its greenest and darkest, and I think they look quite different there:
Ok - I think I've licked the colour problem with just the one tree - autumn versions and purple foliage versions now included. About the only one I'm not altogether happy with is the deepest orange. I think I might have to turn that one brown and call it a dead tree with leaves on it
The two silver trees are aspen, or birch I rendered yesterday (once I discovered how to stop them being so acid green). They seem to have a more realistic shape and form to them, and go a lot better with the rest of the trees.
I'm still missing a couple of those light green colours you get in the early spring, but they aren't going to be half as much of a problem as getting just exactly the right shade of purple! (and even now I'm not sure I have it 100% right)
Unless anyone has any suggestions or comments about the colours as they stand I'm going to start manufacturing a set of about 25 different shapes and sizes of tree, each of all the colours, which will be about 150 trees and take me a couple of days. So I may be some time! LOL
I'm also hoping to do away with that kind of crinkled look in the sprays of leaves, so that they stop looking like my friend has had a go at them with her hair crimpers... LOL. I'll sort it out eventually
That is fantastic, Sue! That's real dedication for verisimilitude in your work! 150 trees! Wow, are you going to be putting these out as icons? I'm certain everyone would thank you if you did! That is just phenominal!
They look pretty well, Sue. My only issue is that looks like a battlemap: we won´t be watching the map with that zoom. I guess you should check more how they look in a lesson zoom. The palette looks fantastic.
I haven't decided what I'm going to do with them after I've finished MC, and I don't really know that they are all that brilliant in comparison with what the professionals can produce - being as weirdly crinkled as they are, and all one of two types in different colours! LOL
I'll think again about it all when I'm done with the city map - see what's what then
Oops - sorry Medio. I must have been typing the last comment when you put yours up, and missed it
Thanks for confirming the colour palette
I know the detail will be lost when I show the full map, but I continue to work on the tiny scale because I will probably end up using these very same symbols for all kinds of things in the future, including battle maps. I wouldn't want to do them all over again just to suit a battle map scale, so I'll make them as if for a battle map from the outset.
Just as a curiosity, though, I will render the full sized map and put it up so you can see the tiny coloured dots on it. LOL!
And here is a quarter section of the full map, done at the same kind of scale that I would use at the Guild (which is why there's only 1/4 of it here - the Guild uploads being 4 times the area of this one).
The trees are very much tiny blobs of colour, but when this map is processed to become one of those Google Earth type maps that you can zoom into and pan around, on the obligatory author's webpage, they will be every bit as large and detailed as the test shots I showed you above. That's why it all has to be about ten times more perfect than at first glance would seem to be necessary
You are simply a cartographic machine! My only nit and it is probably just me is that in the zoomed pics the foliage appears a bit too, kind of sponged on in patches. While I know some trees would certainly look this way from above I would image a percentage wouldn't have so much white space between foliage clusters.
Awesome work though, I can't even get my base looking correct yet.
The sponged on look is the crinkly look I've been trying to get rid of, without success. The trouble is that I only have two trees to render from Vue (without spending an inordinate amount of money to get the software that allows me to draw my own from scratch, which I refuse to do), and that's just the way the foliage is.
Its a very small plum tree made to look like a large tree, and the texture is the actual leaves.
I tried sponging foliage, but the effect was even worse. That's why I turned to Vue.
I'm thinking I will have to take a lot longer and actually draw each tree by hand, scan it in, then colour it till satisfied. I could do this - I have both the training and ability, but it will quite literally take me a year to make just 30 or so. I'm going to have to do the pines that way as it is.
End result - map stagnation.
But I have a book to write, and the writing is getting jammed up in my head and tangled up for want of being written down, so I think this might be the point at which I put the maps away for a bit and just get on with the thing that really started it all - the books.
I've reached that point where I keep on trying harder and harder to make headway with this map, but I don't seem to be getting anywhere new, so I'm going to take a break from it and finish the book.
I will be returning to the task, however, so your comments and assistance will not have been in vain
In the mean time - thanks to you all for all your help and advice - and before you think you might just have gotten rid of me, I will be taking a break from the writing each day to come and watch and comment on your maps, wherever I feel that my words might be of some use
One place for tree inspiration that never fails to deliver is the mapping tentacle of the Googlybeast. There are lots of good specimens that are a bit low resolution, but might fit in nicely with medium resolution exports. There are also no doubt some associated licensing issues, but sampling for texture and observation of form should be within fair use. The nice thing about looking at Google maps is that it's different seasons (within reason) in different places. For example, Piasa, Illinois is currently shown as around winter or later fall, but without snow (based on sun angle), while Kennett, Missouri is in midsummer green. Lots of nice hardwoods of various types in there as well as lots of farmland samples. The landscape around Seattle, Washington is green no matter the season, but there are lots of pines to pick from. Areas around golf courses and graveyard often have lovely specimens in them without a lot of clutter around them.
The fun part about the low-angle winter-type images is that the shadows basically give you the elevation view of the three and the photo shows the overhead view at the bottom. Of course, in the larger cities there are usually 3D approximations at insane (1 foot or so) resolution. They do usually blur out the nude sunbathers, though, which is nice.
Note that if you're pressed for time, attempting the above actions may result in loss of substantial parts of your day.
Thanks Joe. You always write such interesting stuff, and I have to admit that I'd been looking only at individual images of trees "top view", and not a satellite image of them in their natural setting.
I will bear the Google Earth idea in mind.
I'm really sorry to leave it just 1/10 away from done and dusted, but I get these 'stuck' points in my thinking process where I just can't see.... well... LOL - the "wood for the trees". They pass, but like the proverbial log jam, I don't know when the things that are stuck are going to just burst free and clear.
Its a bit like waiting for buses - none for hours, then three all at once, but it really doesn't help if I pace up and down the bus stop getting myself all furious inside about the fact that they're late. LOL!
Being wondering... not sure which kind of geological forms are in your world, but a rocky peninsula on temperate weather don´t tend to have many trees around. Specially if the mankind has decided to use it.If it´s north enough, maybe you would find them - think about Canada´s peninsulas. On the other hand, if there is enough wind and it´s no so humid, it would be a bit more arid - think about Scotland or Ireland rocky coast.
I think the log jam is about to come unstuck, but its a bit early to tell just yet. I have a new idea.
Needless to say, the writing isn't going very far because of it! LOL
I might post something a bit later -depends how the test run turns out
The main problem I had with the ones I did (apart from the rippled effect caused by patterns within the leaves themselves) was that they didn't have any real depth and definition - nothing to define them as trees, rather than just patches of scrub. I think I may just have resolved that problem in the last half hour or so
Well it also looks like a giant green baby, sorry. Near to where the winding road in the south-southwest part of the map comes close to the wall. That green stumpy lookin' thing! I'm not sure but I think it was supposed to be a dead tree.
Comments
I pasted the dead tree in there to try and decide whether to have them on the same sheet, or a separate one (as they currently are because their shadows are less intense. I have the dead tree sheet on top of the living tree sheet at the moment, because in my minds eye the dead trees show up in a forest quite noticeably.
I haven't decided yet whether to keep it that way or not... but as it is, all these trees have been pasted in a very small test site just to see what they look like, and will all be deleted when I actually get around to making a proper symbol set
I have a second test site down in the lowlands where the grass is at its greenest and darkest, and I think they look quite different there:
The two silver trees are aspen, or birch I rendered yesterday (once I discovered how to stop them being so acid green). They seem to have a more realistic shape and form to them, and go a lot better with the rest of the trees.
I'm still missing a couple of those light green colours you get in the early spring, but they aren't going to be half as much of a problem as getting just exactly the right shade of purple! (and even now I'm not sure I have it 100% right)
Unless anyone has any suggestions or comments about the colours as they stand I'm going to start manufacturing a set of about 25 different shapes and sizes of tree, each of all the colours, which will be about 150 trees and take me a couple of days. So I may be some time! LOL
Cheers,
~Dogtag
I'm also hoping to do away with that kind of crinkled look in the sprays of leaves, so that they stop looking like my friend has had a go at them with her hair crimpers... LOL. I'll sort it out eventually
LLAP
Nacon4
I haven't decided what I'm going to do with them after I've finished MC, and I don't really know that they are all that brilliant in comparison with what the professionals can produce - being as weirdly crinkled as they are, and all one of two types in different colours! LOL
I'll think again about it all when I'm done with the city map - see what's what then
Thanks for confirming the colour palette
I know the detail will be lost when I show the full map, but I continue to work on the tiny scale because I will probably end up using these very same symbols for all kinds of things in the future, including battle maps. I wouldn't want to do them all over again just to suit a battle map scale, so I'll make them as if for a battle map from the outset.
Just as a curiosity, though, I will render the full sized map and put it up so you can see the tiny coloured dots on it. LOL!
The trees are very much tiny blobs of colour, but when this map is processed to become one of those Google Earth type maps that you can zoom into and pan around, on the obligatory author's webpage, they will be every bit as large and detailed as the test shots I showed you above. That's why it all has to be about ten times more perfect than at first glance would seem to be necessary
Great job on these!
You say the nicest things
Awesome work though, I can't even get my base looking correct yet.
Keep it up,
Bill
The sponged on look is the crinkly look I've been trying to get rid of, without success. The trouble is that I only have two trees to render from Vue (without spending an inordinate amount of money to get the software that allows me to draw my own from scratch, which I refuse to do), and that's just the way the foliage is.
Its a very small plum tree made to look like a large tree, and the texture is the actual leaves.
I tried sponging foliage, but the effect was even worse. That's why I turned to Vue.
I'm thinking I will have to take a lot longer and actually draw each tree by hand, scan it in, then colour it till satisfied. I could do this - I have both the training and ability, but it will quite literally take me a year to make just 30 or so. I'm going to have to do the pines that way as it is.
End result - map stagnation.
But I have a book to write, and the writing is getting jammed up in my head and tangled up for want of being written down, so I think this might be the point at which I put the maps away for a bit and just get on with the thing that really started it all - the books.
I'll be back, though, don't you worry
I will be returning to the task, however, so your comments and assistance will not have been in vain
In the mean time - thanks to you all for all your help and advice - and before you think you might just have gotten rid of me, I will be taking a break from the writing each day to come and watch and comment on your maps, wherever I feel that my words might be of some use
The fun part about the low-angle winter-type images is that the shadows basically give you the elevation view of the three and the photo shows the overhead view at the bottom. Of course, in the larger cities there are usually 3D approximations at insane (1 foot or so) resolution. They do usually blur out the nude sunbathers, though, which is nice.
Note that if you're pressed for time, attempting the above actions may result in loss of substantial parts of your day.
I will bear the Google Earth idea in mind.
I'm really sorry to leave it just 1/10 away from done and dusted, but I get these 'stuck' points in my thinking process where I just can't see.... well... LOL - the "wood for the trees". They pass, but like the proverbial log jam, I don't know when the things that are stuck are going to just burst free and clear.
Its a bit like waiting for buses - none for hours, then three all at once, but it really doesn't help if I pace up and down the bus stop getting myself all furious inside about the fact that they're late. LOL!
I think the log jam is about to come unstuck, but its a bit early to tell just yet. I have a new idea.
Needless to say, the writing isn't going very far because of it! LOL
I might post something a bit later -depends how the test run turns out
The main problem I had with the ones I did (apart from the rippled effect caused by patterns within the leaves themselves) was that they didn't have any real depth and definition - nothing to define them as trees, rather than just patches of scrub. I think I may just have resolved that problem in the last half hour or so
Thanks for the image, Medio
I will bear that in mind on the more exposed cliff faces, but inland - especially up the more sheltered ravines, there will be trees on Ethran
What do you think? Are they better or worse than before?
LLAP
Nacon4
....*scratches head and stares really hard at the screen*
Giant ant? Where's that then?
Well it also looks like a giant green baby, sorry. Near to where the winding road in the south-southwest part of the map comes close to the wall. That green stumpy lookin' thing! I'm not sure but I think it was supposed to be a dead tree.
LLAP
Nacon4
You know the ones?
LLAP
Nacon4