Oct / Nov '18 Lite Challenge: South Kita Island

[AlfansosRevenge]

This challenge was too tempting to pass on, so I'm throwing my hat into the ring with South Kita Island. I don't know if I'm bending the rules too much, but I preferred this island in a portrait orientation. The coastline hasn't been altered drastically, though. Just rotated .

Here's my first work in progress image:

### Latest WIP ###
SKI_WIP1.png

I'm taking a very different approach to this map than I normally do. I wanted to attempt a more realistic map than the fantasy stuff I normally draw.

Let me know what you think!

[Bogie]

Welcome to the Challenge AlfansosRevenge!
Rotating the map is totally acceptable, can't wait to see what you do with it.

[AlfansosRevenge]

I spent most of the day examining USGS topographical maps, and I'm trying to mimic the style.

Here's an update:

### Latest WIP ###
SKI_WIP2.png

The green areas are not final. I just got started on them so that I could get a feel of how the colors would play out. I want to do some, if not all, of the topographical lines before I continue with the color.

I have already finished the depth lines for the ocean, and I'm very happy with how they turned out.

[kacey]

This is looking really nice so far.

[Gidde]

Hi AlfansosRevenge, good start! I renamed the thread for you so that we can all tell it's a challenge map.

[JsinOwl]

I spent most of the day examining USGS topographical maps, and I'm trying to mimic the style.

Aren't they great! It amazes me how old some of the USGS maps are and that they're all available for free. Such an amazing resource.

[AlfansosRevenge]

Hi AlfansosRevenge, good start! I renamed the thread for you so that we can all tell it's a challenge map.

Thanks! Totally slipped my mind!

[aeshnidae]

Your depth lines are spot on! I like the light paper texture, too.

[AlfansosRevenge]

### Latest WIP ###
SKI_WIP3.png

Here's my latest version. Right now, I'm still too intimidated by the number of topographical lines I need to draw. Instead, I've been focusing on the border and the text on the map. Full disclaimer: I know pretty much nothing about topography or map conventions, so most of the numbers on my map are arbitrary. Reproducing the USGS-style map meant creating a lot of detail, and I lack the knowledge to verify that it makes sense. If you know anything about this style of map and see mistakes or things that obviously don't make sense, let me know!

[JsinOwl]

I like what you've got going here. The numbers are there for effect, not accuracy right? So it doesn't really matter, but if you want to go for maximum authenticity, the elevation change between contour lines in USGS maps is constant (though it varies map to map), say 50 feet/meters between each line. In your map it looks like the interval is approximately doubling, 30, 60, 120, 300, 600. The interval you use would depend on the terrain. So for a really mountainous region, an interval of 100' or more would be appropriate. Out on the plains, you might want an interval of only 10'. Most maps will live somewhere in between.