Moutarde did a lovely illustration of a myth, complete with source materials and what appeared to be a nice fantasy research context. Lovely picture of a scroll that might be described as a map, technically well executed and integrated with the context. But it just didn't seem well suited to the purpose of being a map.

Greason Wolfe went to the other extreme, opting for what appeared to be a fully geologically accurate illustration. It was very photographic and well executed, but it seemed to me to be lacking "mapness".

tilt did what best matched my mental model of a "map" of those presented for the challenge. It showed the important features of a place for the purpose of describing a myth. Was it technically the best executed from a technical standpoint? Probably not by the current standards of most of the guild folks. Did it look like a photograph? Certainly not. It had a few of the external flourishes that would mark it as a picture of a map (some of the shading on the map appeared to be trying to invoke a parchment-type background and it was clear from the symbol style that it was intended to look like a picture of a woodcut from an old book), but those flourishes were all very subordinate to the map.