Article Series: Creating a new Map Style

Ralf

The question of how to create your own map style has come up repeatedly in the past, and while the Cartographer's Annual Volume 1 covers it generally, I thought that a more comprehensive tutorial might be in order.

For that I've started a new article series on the RPGMaps blog. Here is Part 1: Basic Considerations.

Let me know what you think so far below and post any questions you might have. This thread is for discussing the article series.

Loopysue

Thank you Ralf

This is going to be very useful for me in the next few weeks!

[Deleted User]

In section 1, do you mean FCW or FCT for the template file?
Part 2, 1st para - do you mean 'free' or 'three'
Kick me hard if I am being over pedantic. But this whole series is sending flutters of excitement through me - it's just what the doctor ordered.

Ralf

Both corrected, thank you. Keep 'em coming!

LadieStorm

In section 2, is 'bit copying...' supposed to be "but copying..."? Also, the next sentence doesn't make much sense to me... 'That means we need to decide what style we can to create...' I don't think that 'to' is supposed to be there, or did you have something else in mind?
Then the last sentence in the first paragraph of section 2: "I locate the the three files..." Is this supposed to be "I located the three files..."?

DaltonSpence

I think it says good things for the quality of your article when the only "corrections" are for nitpicking typos.

Loopysue

Especially when English is a second language, and has a reputation for being difficult to learn

Your English is so good, Ralf, that I usually forget you aren't in fact English! LOL!

Ralf

Hi folks, part 2 of the series is now on the blog. This time I look at creating and importing the new fills for the style.

Nitpicking (and other) corrections are welcome as always!

Loopysue

Thanks Ralf

Loopysue

Hi Ralf

Are you going to do a part 3 for this series?

Ralf

Yes, I am. Sorry for the break in this.

Loopysue

Oh no! I wasn't pushing.

Sorry - what I should have said was - is it complete? I didn't know if it was finished or not

Ralf

No, you're absolutely right to ask, this is not finished and I wanted to add more since the last article. But circumstances conspired against that.

Loopysue

Well the first two have been extremely useful to me over the last couple of days

roy.denton

This great, just what I was looking for.

roy.denton

Ralf, any idea when the next instalment may be out?

Ralf

Yep, a pretty good one ... now. The new article is available here.

Loopysue

It's not showing, Ralf.

Edit: All mended now - thanks

roy.denton

Cool, thanks Ralf. Just what I needed.

roy.denton

I really like your articles, they have been a great help.

However, I am trying to wrap my head around scale/units. I believe I have it right that in a standard map the units are miles (overland) and feet (dungeon/building). Not sure about cities. In metric it would be kilometers and meters respectively I believe.

Where my confusion comes in is an overland template has: inches = 1.0000. What exactly does this mean, one inch equals one mile?

JimP

one inch equals one mile means one inch on the map is one mile in the field.

Had to learn this for map reading in Boy Scouts.

roy.denton

So, this means a map that is 1000x800 is that many map inches wide and tall? Spatially speaking since on the screen it doesn’t look that way.

Pixel wise, what does this translate to per inch in CC3+?

roy.denton

One reason I am trying to get this straight in my head is that Harnic regional maps are only 65x62.5 miles or 100x104 kilometers, the distances are measured in centimeters, each being 2.5 miles or 4 kilometers.

The other reason is trying to determine how to scale my symbols.

Monsen

Posted By: roy.dentonSo, this means a map that is 1000x800 is that many map inches wide and tall?

Technically, CC3+ does believe the map is 1000x800 inches, because it cannot actually handle a file many miles in the dimensions. But all tools and everything is set up to work as if this were actual miles/km, so for overland maps, you should think about map units as miles/km, and forget the inches, they are just an artifact of the representation, and isn't relevant.
When you make a map in CC3+ that depicts a 100 by 100 mile area, you make the map 100 by 100 in CC3+, you don't scale it.

Spatially speaking since on the screen it doesn’t look that way. Pixel wise, what does this translate to per inch in CC3+?

These measurements doesn't have anything with the size of the map in the screen. These refer to the area the map covers. It isn't related to screen or print size (Although it does come into effect if you do a scaled print)
Likewise, your question about pixels per inch is meaningless. CC3+ maps isn't measured in pixels. When you render a map to an image, you can render it to whatever pixel size you desire, this isn't dependent on the map size at all. Of course, your screen uses pixels, so it is rendered to pixels when displayed on the screen, but the map doesn't have a fixed pixel size, the pixels per map unit on the screen will just depend on your current zoom level, not on the map size.

Wyvern

Roy, in terms of scaling your symbols - or creating new symbols to an appropriate scale - there are suggested standard symbol sizes for different types of map as Monsen commented on your Symbol creation question topic already. You may find it helpful also to see what pixel sizes others have used to create their VH size symbols for whatever similar CC3+ symbol sets you have installed, as sometimes these can vary from that standard, which may give you a better idea of what to aim for when constructing your own.

roy.denton

Thanks all. Much clearer now. I was mostly confused on the symbols part because of the pixels per unit for highest resolution.

Elfling

Hey Ralf, I know things have been a little crazy during this crisis, but do you have any idea when you'll be posting part 4 of your series?