So you are an advocate of light color at the highest altitude and darker as you get lower? There are only 8 contour lines drawn, but I would then want a layer drawn such that the 200 level is the next to darkest layer I use.
So, if I go with browns, then I get the below: color 46 at the top and 39 at the bottom. I might have missed one, but that's the idea.
How about a background of relatively pale brown with all the contours in Solid White 10 on top of that? Do they really need to be so very very different in shade? Surely it is more about an indication of height and slope than a clear set of steps.
This is 4 sheets.
-Base of brown -Contour levels on one sheet drawn in Solid White 10 -Forest with Blend Mode set to multiply and 40 percent opacity -Roads with black Outer Glow effect.
Admittedly it means that you will have a basic background of brown, but if you go for the palest you can get away with it won't be so very dark. I think I did 9 contours there. Did you say you only had 8? Well, you could probably do with a slightly paler brown than that. Remember that you can always adjust the colour palette to give you exactly the right brown. Just remember to attach it to your drawing before you save it and shut down for the night.
The reason I am suggesting that you start dark at the base is because the hills stick up out of it in white as if they are closer to the sun. The eye sees it better than when its the other way around. Dark hill tops look like holes in the ground.
How can you draw the contours all on one sheet and have them all be the same color of white? I have to follow the previous lines.
Below is a start where the lowest elevation is darkest (<200 meters, the river bottom), then the 200 meter line, then the first work on the 300m line. the bulk of the color is the 200m line Only the closed contours are drawn at this point on the 300m line. You can see where I will be drawing the 300m contours.
I guess I could color them all in the same shade going up and if they are transparent(?) they will get darker as they go up?
As to the delightfully subtle shading, I need a little more spread because I am color challenged and my 65 year old eyes with their cataracts out are quite as good as they were before. (although the world is brighter and the ladies were all prettier after I had them out.)
I like the black outlines on the roads, but I fear it will look bad on the map. How does it know how to skip the intersections where the white road is under the red road?
Of course, I could use a faint green on the bottom instead of brown? After all, this is Europe we are talking about, not the American Southwest which has a lot of desert and its brown even in Kansas. Kansas is a drab state sometimes, as you know if you watched the Wizard of Oz. (I like it though. I need yearly visits to the Great Plains as well as the Everglades.)
Actually, although it would mean having the contours on separate sheets, it might be better to do it that way so that you could make them all solid white and have a transparency effect on each one set to 10% as you said.
That way, you could adjust the transparency settings if the step was too subtle - remembering to set it the same for each contour sheet.
I think you have started WAY too dark there, but leave it as it is and just concentrate on setting it all up to start with. Your contours will have to be converted into solid polygons.
You could do it in any colour you like, as long as its not overpowering the rest of the map. Browns, greys - that sort of thing. Green is probably not a great idea, since the forest is also green.
So, when I look at Fred 2, I don't see anything because the whole screen is white. You clearly have cast some spell, because when you turn on Fred 1 and 2, you see the color gradation. How do you know what you have done or did you just guess?
Also, if you do this on 10 sheets say, and the first is color 1 (brown) and the other 9 all use White 10, why don't they get darker on the way up?
Almost all of the contours on my map are merely lines. When I finish the 300m layer, there will be one long continuous contour that defines most of the terrain on the layer, except for those that are closed. And not all the lines making up that one contour connect with each other so there are gaps and/or overlaps. And they are very complex in outline.
At any rate, I guess the way I would approach this is when I am done, select a color. Change the color on all sheets to that color. Then set each sheet to 10% opacity (90% transparency?) and see what happens.
I really like the forest. It looks much better than it does on my map, which of course, I have not tried to adjust yet.
Sadly, I cannot tell the palette on Fred apart from my palette. And they taste the same.
OH! I see. White does get 'darker' but because of the brown, it somehow looks like it gets brighter (because when I do it with the brown shade, it gets darker as it goes up).
On the other hand, I can see them both as crests or as holes. I think it has something to do with learning to be able to read stereoscopic photographs without a stereoscope.
And with that, I can see why starting with Green would be a BAD IDEA.
Fred 2 is the sheet with all the contours on it in that previous file. The reason you can't see them when you look at them in isolation is because they are white, and the window background is white.
Imagine that you have a brown table, and that you are cutting out your contours on the finest grade tracing paper - so fine that its almost but not quite totally transparent. As you add each contour the tracing paper layers get thicker, and the table becomes less visible through them, until you add the last one and you can't see the brown table through it at all. The tracing paper is white, so it looks white. That is how the shading works in this file.
I have attached a second very similar file using only filled polygons - no special transparent fills in this one. The contours are separated onto individual sheets. All are simple white polygons, and all have the same transparency sheet effect on them.
LOL! And believe me - the palette really is quite different
Now, what I don't see is how you know where the other contour lines are as you go up slope and the lines get smaller and more concentric.
So,it looks like to me I will have to first convert each contour layer with its own shade of brown. What it looks like when I finish doesn't really matter, but they go from shade 39 at bottom to 47 at the top). So I finish them all and it looks "right".
Then I go to the lowest layer (which for the sake of argument is Brown (Shade 39) and I convert it to very light brown (shade 47).
Then I go to each one and change it from whatever shade of brown it is (say 40 for the next to bottom layer) and convert it to white and its transparency to 10%. Save it.
Repeat until I get to the top.
So if I look at them with the sheet effects off is just some sort of white blob, surrounded by that light brown background.
Then, I activate the sheet effects, click OK, and then the thing will look like a work of art. Or at least different and cooler than my different shades of brown and more like your Fred Map.
So by Pallette, do you mean the display you get when you click on the color patch next to the sheet layer or do you mean the stuff you get when you click on the right hand box named FS: Solid? I do see a marked difference between the choices on Fred1/2 then on my map in the Bitmap Files selection.
Try to forget all that stuff about colouring the contours. The only contour that has a colour is the lowest of them all, and that one will be your brown/grey or whatever colour you want the whole set of contours to be. That is your BACKGROUND sheet.
The rest of the contours are all white polygons. Each of them sits on a sheet of its own and has a single transparency effect that makes it only 10% opaque (90% transparent). that means if you add just the first white contour (which will actually be the second lowest level in your map because the brown is the lowest level), it will be a white blob siting on top of the brown background. But because it has a transparency effect that makes it only just visible most of the brown will show through it - just like if you put a single sheet of fine quality tracing paper on a brown table that was cut to that exact shape of that contour.
Then, when you add the second contour (the third lowest level in your map) on the second contour sheet, as a second white polygon, that will be like a second sheet of tracing paper set on top of the first, but smaller than the first, so that you will see the table top where there is no tracing paper, a slightly paler table top in places where there is only one contour covering it up, and a slightly paler table top again where there are 2 layers of tracing paper covering it up. Through both of these sheets of tracing paper you will still be able to see the brown of the table top, but to a lesser degree the more tracing paper you are looking through.
The colour palette is the grid of colours you see when you click the colour block in the top bar. It shows you all the colours you can use in this particular map.
I have customised the palette in the example FCWs I uploaded here to give a smoother less harshly 'in your face' palette. The reason I mentioned it was because the steps between each colour patch are less severe and you might stand a better chance of picking exactly the right shade of brown for your background colour.
The background sheet is the only contour that needs to be coloured, but it has to be the right colour - the palest brown or grey you can get away with and still be able to see the gradations between the contours on top of it.
Sue, you are doing a fine job of explaining. I think I am not phrasing my question correctly. And we probably don't think the same due to the difference in our backgrounds.
The way I am approaching this task, I think is a little different than just drawing new blobs on a map. I already have the lines drawn, and they are properly arrayed so they are nested. First, I need to convert them from lines, which in many cases are not connected or overlapping, to polygons instead of lines so they can get filled in. As you can see I have started that process. Whether I can use the system to trace them, convert them to paths then to polygons, rather than just apply brute force and ignorance to do the job remains to be seen.
So, first I get the 2nd lowest sheet converted and looking right. If I do it wrong, it fills in the 'wrong' way. It's brown so I can see it.
Then I do the other sheets (300m - 900m) the same way. Turn on all the sheets, make sure they are correct and provide the same picture.
Then I change the fill on the first shade to the lightest shade of brown there is.
Then I individually change the shades on the other sheets all to white in turn and and then turn on the sheet effects.
Then it is done!
break break break break
What I do not get is when you drew the FRED1, you drew all the white polygons on the same sheet. How did you keep track of where the first polygon was? How do you place all the subsequent polygons so they are inside the lower one as you go up? (I dunno, maybe you go down.) And the examples are very simple, not the highly complex lines I have. When you just display the white polygon layer, its white.
At any rate, no matter how I get there, the white stacked polygon idea is great.
Ok. I think it is me who caused the confusion. Sorry!
I gave you two alternative methods in two alternative files.
The first file used a special transparent white fill, which works just like tracing paper even when you draw polygons on the same sheet.
The second method uses simple white polygons which have to be drawn one per sheet, and it is better for that. The reason it is better is that you have more control over the amount of transparency for each contour. So instead of being stuck with 10% opacity as you would in the first case, you can alter all the transparency effects in the second file to 12% or some other number - all according to how much you need for you to be able to see the difference between the different contours when the effects are turned on.
Two files - two separate methods. The second one is best. Please ignore the first one.
Now for the drawing logistics...
You can convert the lines you have drawn to paths by right clicking the Fractalise tool and picking Line To Path, then selecting a whole contour at once and converting it.
When all the contours are paths you can join separate segments of path together by using another tool in the same right click menu from Fractalise, and that is Combine Paths. This tool occasionally joins the wrong ends of two paths, but you can correct it using the shortcut keys F and S as directed by the Command line at the time of joining the paths.
Once the entire contour is joined up into just one long path (or several islands that are one path), you can convert them to polygons using a third tool from the Fractalise right click menu - Path to Poly. This conversion will fill the resulting polygon with whatever fill you had selected at the time you drew it, which means it would be a miracle if you ended up with a white polygon. You will need to change the fill using the Change Properties tool to Solid, and white.
Sue, I am not deliberately trying to be stupid or obtuse. The question is not so much about how to draw the polygons or connect them.
The question is, How do YOU maintain your situational awareness to know how you are placing these very faint white polygons on top of each other so they provide the correct picture when completed?
As I progress through the sequence perhaps my lack of understanding will become clearer.
You will need to work with the sheet effects turned on, and to refresh the screen after each action.
I do this by rocking the mouse wheel back and forth one notch just quickly. It forces a redraw without having to hit the refresh button all the time.
...
Just as a side note here, I recommend starting with a much darker brown for the background sheet while you are working on the contours, or you still won't see very much even with the sheet effects on. You can change it for a lighter brown later on when the contours are all there.
NOW I can see what I was doing. The question I have is how YOU MAINTAIN your situational awareness of where the polygons are when you are drawing them freehand?
The question may seem silly, but I assure you I am being serious and I hope I am not just being stupid. I can see how I can approach the problem. Draw the polygons in order Red, orange, yellow, blue, indigo, violet, white, gray, black, and stuff, then at the end, switch them all to white in turn and make them transparent. How do you do it?
I meant sheets, not layers. My use of layers comes from us hanging acetate overlays with index markers on them and attached with velcro or holes in the acetate located at specific places so we can be assure that everyone's overlays would lay on top of each other so the graphics all line up. If you use thick lines and do not position the overlay very precisely, you can end up with huge gaps through which the enemy can penetrate and cause mischief. we called the individuial overlays layers.
Notice that I lost my SA about where the stuff was at as I drew the additional polygons on their seperate sheets. Perhaps I made a mountain out of a molehole.
Ok. Well, I'm still not really getting it I don't think, but I just watch where the line that I've already drawn has gone and come back around to meet it.
I have the advantage that I don't have to follow a predefined course. I just draw.
OK. That makes sense. I guess a way to do it would be to draw the things in white with a small outside line (0.001) and then when you are finished with it, set the width to 0.000000 and all works well.
Thanks for indulging me and penetrating the frontal slope of my brain case.
A little progress here after Sue gave me a lot of coaching. I have partially completed most of, if not all, the smaller closed contours on the map in various shades of brown. The next step is to complete the outer, really windy contours that are anchored on the map perimeter. The three top most sheets are complete as well as the bottom two. There is at least a day's work (maybe one sheet a day, I find the long contours exhausting) to get the ones in between finished, but I think I'm through for the day. This is, of course, only an intermediate step before I choose a light brown or green color for the base layer and then convert all the other sheets to white, highly transparent fills.
I have now completed most, if not all, of the smaller closed contours, leaving the ones that connect to the edge and meander all over the map. Below you see the result of the 500m level. The top left large polygon, not particularly complicated, took me 40 minutes to do. The first 20 minutes, I mistakenly used the smooth path instead of the smooth polygon. So here, we are, the first attempt at converting to a polygon. I, probably mistakenly decided the difference between a line and a path, was a path was a single continuous line whereas the "line" is a series of disconnected lines. SO I select Line to Path, click on DO IT, then watch the cursor spin for a bit and YAY! The program crashes. Foolishly I did not save before I pushed that button. So, power it up again, open the file, and making sure I have selected smooth polygon, proceed to spend another 20 minutes retracing the line from south to north. Tension builds as I near completion. Will I mistakenly push the right mouse button. I finish the final click on the west edge of the map, with baited breath push C to make it a corner, scroll the map down to the first point in the south, push C for another corner, and then, breath held, right click, and LO! it draws.
I think I need some bourbon. I'm not doing the other one tomorrow.
someone will ask, "Mike, why don't you just use trace?" I dunno. All these new fangled inventions. Sometimes I am just a Brute Force and Ignorance guy, and I am really never sure which paths to take. The big one to the south is many lines that sometimes join neatly, sometimes overlap, and sometimes have a large gap. I guess I just don't trust the software to do for me what it hopefully does for the rest of you.
Anyway, this next polygon completes the 500m level and there is just two more to go. That's why the second shot below looks a little empty. The darkest layer is 100M and the lightest is 900m
Comments
I agree that the contours should not be transparent. fortunantly, it shouldn't be very hard to add filled contours.
That said, the road network and maybe the waterways can be thinned. I didn't put all of them in to this point.
So you are an advocate of light color at the highest altitude and darker as you get lower? There are only 8 contour lines drawn, but I would then want a layer drawn such that the 200 level is the next to darkest layer I use.
So, if I go with browns, then I get the below: color 46 at the top and 39 at the bottom. I might have missed one, but that's the idea.
This is 4 sheets.
-Base of brown
-Contour levels on one sheet drawn in Solid White 10
-Forest with Blend Mode set to multiply and 40 percent opacity
-Roads with black Outer Glow effect.
The reason I am suggesting that you start dark at the base is because the hills stick up out of it in white as if they are closer to the sun. The eye sees it better than when its the other way around. Dark hill tops look like holes in the ground.
How can you draw the contours all on one sheet and have them all be the same color of white? I have to follow the previous lines.
Below is a start where the lowest elevation is darkest (<200 meters, the river bottom), then the 200 meter line, then the first work on the 300m line. the bulk of the color is the 200m line Only the closed contours are drawn at this point on the 300m line. You can see where I will be drawing the 300m contours.
I guess I could color them all in the same shade going up and if they are transparent(?) they will get darker as they go up?
As to the delightfully subtle shading, I need a little more spread because I am color challenged and my 65 year old eyes with their cataracts out are quite as good as they were before. (although the world is brighter and the ladies were all prettier after I had them out.)
I like the black outlines on the roads, but I fear it will look bad on the map. How does it know how to skip the intersections where the white road is under the red road?
That way, you could adjust the transparency settings if the step was too subtle - remembering to set it the same for each contour sheet.
I think you have started WAY too dark there, but leave it as it is and just concentrate on setting it all up to start with. Your contours will have to be converted into solid polygons.
The Solid White 10 is a transparent fill.
The roads are all on the same sheet, so the Outer Glow will only glow on the outside of the entire extent, meaning that it never cuts across a road.
I think you have an attached colour palette on this FCW that I created to be less harsh than the default palette. You could use that one if you like.
Also, if you do this on 10 sheets say, and the first is color 1 (brown) and the other 9 all use White 10, why don't they get darker on the way up?
Almost all of the contours on my map are merely lines. When I finish the 300m layer, there will be one long continuous contour that defines most of the terrain on the layer, except for those that are closed. And not all the lines making up that one contour connect with each other so there are gaps and/or overlaps. And they are very complex in outline.
At any rate, I guess the way I would approach this is when I am done, select a color. Change the color on all sheets to that color. Then set each sheet to 10% opacity (90% transparency?) and see what happens.
I really like the forest. It looks much better than it does on my map, which of course, I have not tried to adjust yet.
Sadly, I cannot tell the palette on Fred apart from my palette. And they taste the same.
On the other hand, I can see them both as crests or as holes. I think it has something to do with learning to be able to read stereoscopic photographs without a stereoscope.
And with that, I can see why starting with Green would be a BAD IDEA.
Imagine that you have a brown table, and that you are cutting out your contours on the finest grade tracing paper - so fine that its almost but not quite totally transparent. As you add each contour the tracing paper layers get thicker, and the table becomes less visible through them, until you add the last one and you can't see the brown table through it at all. The tracing paper is white, so it looks white. That is how the shading works in this file.
I have attached a second very similar file using only filled polygons - no special transparent fills in this one. The contours are separated onto individual sheets. All are simple white polygons, and all have the same transparency sheet effect on them.
LOL! And believe me - the palette really is quite different
Now, what I don't see is how you know where the other contour lines are as you go up slope and the lines get smaller and more concentric.
So,it looks like to me I will have to first convert each contour layer with its own shade of brown. What it looks like when I finish doesn't really matter, but they go from shade 39 at bottom to 47 at the top). So I finish them all and it looks "right".
Then I go to the lowest layer (which for the sake of argument is Brown (Shade 39) and I convert it to very light brown (shade 47).
Then I go to each one and change it from whatever shade of brown it is (say 40 for the next to bottom layer) and convert it to white and its transparency to 10%. Save it.
Repeat until I get to the top.
So if I look at them with the sheet effects off is just some sort of white blob, surrounded by that light brown background.
Then, I activate the sheet effects, click OK, and then the thing will look like a work of art. Or at least different and cooler than my different shades of brown and more like your Fred Map.
So by Pallette, do you mean the display you get when you click on the color patch next to the sheet layer or do you mean the stuff you get when you click on the right hand box named FS: Solid? I do see a marked difference between the choices on Fred1/2 then on my map in the Bitmap Files selection.
I must not have explained it right at all.
Try to forget all that stuff about colouring the contours. The only contour that has a colour is the lowest of them all, and that one will be your brown/grey or whatever colour you want the whole set of contours to be. That is your BACKGROUND sheet.
The rest of the contours are all white polygons. Each of them sits on a sheet of its own and has a single transparency effect that makes it only 10% opaque (90% transparent). that means if you add just the first white contour (which will actually be the second lowest level in your map because the brown is the lowest level), it will be a white blob siting on top of the brown background. But because it has a transparency effect that makes it only just visible most of the brown will show through it - just like if you put a single sheet of fine quality tracing paper on a brown table that was cut to that exact shape of that contour.
Then, when you add the second contour (the third lowest level in your map) on the second contour sheet, as a second white polygon, that will be like a second sheet of tracing paper set on top of the first, but smaller than the first, so that you will see the table top where there is no tracing paper, a slightly paler table top in places where there is only one contour covering it up, and a slightly paler table top again where there are 2 layers of tracing paper covering it up. Through both of these sheets of tracing paper you will still be able to see the brown of the table top, but to a lesser degree the more tracing paper you are looking through.
I have customised the palette in the example FCWs I uploaded here to give a smoother less harshly 'in your face' palette. The reason I mentioned it was because the steps between each colour patch are less severe and you might stand a better chance of picking exactly the right shade of brown for your background colour.
The background sheet is the only contour that needs to be coloured, but it has to be the right colour - the palest brown or grey you can get away with and still be able to see the gradations between the contours on top of it.
The way I am approaching this task, I think is a little different than just drawing new blobs on a map. I already have the lines drawn, and they are properly arrayed so they are nested. First, I need to convert them from lines, which in many cases are not connected or overlapping, to polygons instead of lines so they can get filled in. As you can see I have started that process. Whether I can use the system to trace them, convert them to paths then to polygons, rather than just apply brute force and ignorance to do the job remains to be seen.
So, first I get the 2nd lowest sheet converted and looking right. If I do it wrong, it fills in the 'wrong' way. It's brown so I can see it.
Then I do the other sheets (300m - 900m) the same way. Turn on all the sheets, make sure they are correct and provide the same picture.
Then I change the fill on the first shade to the lightest shade of brown there is.
Then I individually change the shades on the other sheets all to white in turn and and then turn on the sheet effects.
Then it is done!
break break break break
What I do not get is when you drew the FRED1, you drew all the white polygons on the same sheet. How did you keep track of where the first polygon was? How do you place all the subsequent polygons so they are inside the lower one as you go up? (I dunno, maybe you go down.) And the examples are very simple, not the highly complex lines I have. When you just display the white polygon layer, its white.
At any rate, no matter how I get there, the white stacked polygon idea is great.
I gave you two alternative methods in two alternative files.
The first file used a special transparent white fill, which works just like tracing paper even when you draw polygons on the same sheet.
The second method uses simple white polygons which have to be drawn one per sheet, and it is better for that. The reason it is better is that you have more control over the amount of transparency for each contour. So instead of being stuck with 10% opacity as you would in the first case, you can alter all the transparency effects in the second file to 12% or some other number - all according to how much you need for you to be able to see the difference between the different contours when the effects are turned on.
Two files - two separate methods. The second one is best. Please ignore the first one.
Now for the drawing logistics...
You can convert the lines you have drawn to paths by right clicking the Fractalise tool and picking Line To Path, then selecting a whole contour at once and converting it.
When all the contours are paths you can join separate segments of path together by using another tool in the same right click menu from Fractalise, and that is Combine Paths. This tool occasionally joins the wrong ends of two paths, but you can correct it using the shortcut keys F and S as directed by the Command line at the time of joining the paths.
Once the entire contour is joined up into just one long path (or several islands that are one path), you can convert them to polygons using a third tool from the Fractalise right click menu - Path to Poly. This conversion will fill the resulting polygon with whatever fill you had selected at the time you drew it, which means it would be a miracle if you ended up with a white polygon. You will need to change the fill using the Change Properties tool to Solid, and white.
The question is, How do YOU maintain your situational awareness to know how you are placing these very faint white polygons on top of each other so they provide the correct picture when completed?
As I progress through the sequence perhaps my lack of understanding will become clearer.
Nevertheless, add some more layers. No transparency
Then turn them all transparent. Are they even there?
You will need to work with the sheet effects turned on, and to refresh the screen after each action.
I do this by rocking the mouse wheel back and forth one notch just quickly. It forces a redraw without having to hit the refresh button all the time.
...
Just as a side note here, I recommend starting with a much darker brown for the background sheet while you are working on the contours, or you still won't see very much even with the sheet effects on. You can change it for a lighter brown later on when the contours are all there.
Each contour is on its own *sheet*. Each sheet has its own transparency effect set to opacity of 10%.
Start with the background much darker for working on.
NOW I can see what I was doing. The question I have is how YOU MAINTAIN your situational awareness of where the polygons are when you are drawing them freehand?
The question may seem silly, but I assure you I am being serious and I hope I am not just being stupid. I can see how I can approach the problem. Draw the polygons in order Red, orange, yellow, blue, indigo, violet, white, gray, black, and stuff, then at the end, switch them all to white in turn and make them transparent. How do you do it?
I meant sheets, not layers. My use of layers comes from us hanging acetate overlays with index markers on them and attached with velcro or holes in the acetate located at specific places so we can be assure that everyone's overlays would lay on top of each other so the graphics all line up. If you use thick lines and do not position the overlay very precisely, you can end up with huge gaps through which the enemy can penetrate and cause mischief. we called the individuial overlays layers.
I have the advantage that I don't have to follow a predefined course. I just draw.
Thanks for indulging me and penetrating the frontal slope of my brain case.
We'll see how it goes.
I think I need some bourbon. I'm not doing the other one tomorrow.
someone will ask, "Mike, why don't you just use trace?" I dunno. All these new fangled inventions. Sometimes I am just a Brute Force and Ignorance guy, and I am really never sure which paths to take. The big one to the south is many lines that sometimes join neatly, sometimes overlap, and sometimes have a large gap. I guess I just don't trust the software to do for me what it hopefully does for the rest of you.
Anyway, this next polygon completes the 500m level and there is just two more to go. That's why the second shot below looks a little empty. The darkest layer is 100M and the lightest is 900m