Symbols Set(s) Project Update: "Scooby Doo" Syndrome...

Ok, I have been drawing, and drawing, and drawing, and drawing. I have been told by the sacred sages of this forum to "keep'em simple" (paraphrasing), i.e. - To not make them really detailed or they will look gunked up on a map. I also know to keep colors as vivid - yet well blended as possible - so that they look good on a map as overland symbols and map markers without looking goofy. I also know to make them as readily recognizable as possible.

Ok, check - check - and double check...

I have looked them over - and unfortunately have come to the conclusion that they look like they should be stamped on a playschool toy, or emblazoned on a pre-scooler's tin lunchbox. In short - my drawings are suffering from a horrible case of "Scooby Doo Syndrome". I am afraid that they have crossed over the border from the realm of super cool awsomeness - to the happy land of "Aaaaaawww - ain't that adorable or what?". The Fisher Price Company would like these, as would anyone looking for interesting letterheads and clipart for a day care center, lol:)

Question - am I being too harsh on myself, or right on the money about it - be brutally honest please - your critique?

Comments

  • MonsenMonsen Administrator 🖼️ 81 images Cartographer
    Actually, I think most of your symbols are quite nice. Yes, they are a bit more cartoony than the default CC3 symbols, so they don't blend too well together with them, but with all these symbols, your symbols form a style by themselves.
  • Thanks Remy, So over all do they pass muster - I mean - is it something that folks would like to use on their maps - or are they too "cutesy"?
  • Hmm... A few might look cutesy, but overall I would use them on Crestar.
  • Thanks Jim. I guess that I'm going to have to do the whole gammot of symbol types (Mountains, Trees, Communities, etc.) if they would clash with regular map symbols (would they really?).
    I need more input though - I'm wondering if they are really even appealing or not - because I'm tempted right now to trash can them and start all over again, lol.
  • Your symbols are very nice. Wish I could do half as well:)
    I would definitely use those symbols but probably on vector maps (see Monsen's comment).
  • edited September 2011
    Thank you Joachim de Ravenbel. Vector? - Hmmmm, I guess feasably I could distribute .svg (Vector) versions. I really want them to be useable in CC3 though. It would be nice if after I get them done I could print out a .PDF preview booklet of all of the symbols, and somehow have a vote or a survey or something and see the ratio of thumbs up to thumbs down. It would give me some idea as to whether or not I'm on the right track with these things - or if I'm just barking up the wrong tree, lol. How useable as far as CC3 is concerned would vector versions be? is .svg the usual vector format folks are using - or should they be DXF, or some other type of metafile (DWG,FCD, or ECW 4.5)?
  • Uhm aren't the regular symbols, vector symbols ?
  • edited September 2011
    Actually Jim, I was just perusing the file folders, and they look like they're in .png and .FSC format.

    .Png and .svg I know, but .FSC I don't. I'm gonna have to look that one up. I DO know that when I'm ready to package these puppies up, they will be in both .png and .svg versions.
    I'm assuming that .FSC IS a vector format - or it's a compressed package containing vector files.
  • MonsenMonsen Administrator 🖼️ 81 images Cartographer
    edited September 2011
    Svg is useless for CC3 use, but can be nice for other uses.

    .FSC is just the regular CC3 map format, nothing special about that one. Everything inside is of course vector entities, CC3's native stuff. To draw proper CC3 vector symbols, they mist be drawn inside CC3 with CC3's own tools though, I've never seen a converter. CC3 can read autocad (DWG/DXF) files, but those doesn't support the same features as FastCad (CC3's engine), so I don't believe going through that format will be perfect (although it may give a starting point if you can convert to it, so it is worth a try).

    Your symbols do look like they will be perfect as vector symbols though, but vector symbols are usually best drawn from scratch, and not converted.
  • edited September 2011
    Actually Remy - the drawings have not been scaled yet - so I actually could probably convert them since they are large anyway, and I'm not sure that my scanner can output vector format.
    Anyway - the main point is this - will these look good in CC3, not necessarily with the symbols that are already installed - but say - if I did additional symbols for mountains, trees, hills, structures, whatever - in order to establish a full art style pack? Would the effort really be worth it?

    Could these symbols be used to produce qaulity, great looking maps, or are they just mildly novel clip art? How truly useable do you think that they could be, from a qaulity control perspective? Would they look good as .png symbols on a map through CC3?

    As far as converting the images from .png to .svg - I have in my freeware disk collection an app called "Potrace" somewhere - that can remove / smooth out pixelation (even though some of the images are so large - that I don't think that it would probably matter much anyway). That may mean however, that I might have to do some recolorizational touch ups and tweaks in Inkspace possibly. I believe that there may be a script or trick within Inkspace itself that will "depixelize" an image, not sure.

    Either way - I'm going to keep drawing,lol ;)
  • .FSC is the CC3 extension for symbol files. Vector symbols are defined and the artwork contained within, were as bitmap symbols are defined in the .FSC file and reference external PNG files for the artwork.
  • MonsenMonsen Administrator 🖼️ 81 images Cartographer
    I doubt your scanner can output vector format. Additionally, the programs that convert from raster to vector rarely do a stellar job, because of the inherent difficulty in doing this. Simple images are rather easy, but converting a bit more complicated image usually cause problems because the resulting vector image simply gets too complicated. One example is backgrounds. When you make a vector symbol from scratch, your background is probably one big simple entity, partially covered by other, smaller entities. A raster to vector converter won't see this, and would create each visible part of the background as it's own entity.

    And again, to use it in CC3, it must be a CC3 vector image, that is, a drawing built using CC3's basic shapes. Bottom line is, if you draw them on paper and scan them in, you should probably stick with the png format. If you want to have them in vector format, you will most likely need to redraw them inside CC3 from scratch.

    As for creating a complete style pack, well that is a good idea. I love having multiple styles to select from when I make maps, and I am sure most of the community do as well. However, it is a lot of work, so you should decide for yourself if it is really worth it. If you enjoy doing it, then it probably is :)
  • edited September 2011
    Thank you Remy. I did put a few in inkscape and after vectorization, they didn't look all that bad at all - but I did have to edit some color zones - and I do suspect that if I do make .svg versions of my images then I will have to remove the color zones in inkscape through bitmap trace, and then recolorize the image within inkscape. All in all though - even though vectorization wasn't perfect - I think I can pretty much fix the imperfection with some elbow grease.

    I think the CC3 versions will just remain the original .png files (maybe even refined within inkscape, and then exported from there as a .png, If I could somehow export, or reestablish image transparency).

    Since I am working with a mouse - for drawing up the CC3 symbols - it's gonna have to be scanner, ink, and paper, lol ;)

    P.S. - I have a big "multifunctional" scanner / printer / fax machine / photo printer machine (Epson Stylus CX6000), and I haven't ever used even half of all of the functions on this kooky thing, lol. Just used the basic scanner and printer modes - and the software that it came with just gives me the option to output .bmp, Jpeg(yuck), .pdf, and tif / tiff.
  • Posted By: Terraformer_AuthorHmmmm, I guess feasably I could distribute .svg (Vector) versions.
    Don't get me wrong here, TA, you don't need to turn symbols in vector drawing to use them on a *vector style* map. PNG would be very nice.
    Posted By: JimPUhm aren't the regular symbols, vector symbols ?
    What's a *regular* symbol ?
    Standard CC3/DD3 symbols are PNGs
    Filled, Line, Monochrome etc are vectors.
  • edited September 2011
    Thank you Joachim de Ravenbel. Yes - I'm going to use my original plan for CC3 compatibility and keep the symbols in .png format. I will also do .svg versions as well. As a matter of fact I am considering packaging each image in multiple image formats (universal platform independant formats / portable formats). I will not - however - use jpeg, as jpeg is the digital equivalent of chihuahua poop, lol. :)

    It's ok for forum thread images (because it does keep page re-load time brief and clean) - but a lousy format for an image or media product.
  • I think PNG bitmap symbols is the way to go for this project too. From your amazing artwork to your work on Terraformer for Fractal Terrains, you are a true Renaissance Man, T_A! :)
  • edited September 2011
    Thank you so very much for that kind compliment jaerdaph my dear friend - but please refrain from complimenting me too much, or I'll turn into an egotistical fat head and get all delusional about myself - which is usually followed by me getting slapped or having a drink thrown in my face, lol :).
Sign In or Register to comment.