Lands of Fagacea

[Freehand 5.5]

It's alway questionable to compose computer generated graphics with hand drawings.
But the technical problem with the 3d-graphics is that it is completely blurred and too rough.
Throw it away and do it again with at least double dpi quality.
The line drawings of the trees, hills and settlements are so nice and sharp.
In my opinion that's the main reason why it doesn't fit.

[aquarits]

It's alway questionable to compose computer generated graphics with hand drawings.
But the technical problem with the 3d-graphics is that it is completely blurred and too rough.
Throw it away and do it again with at least double dpi quality.
The line drawings of the trees, hills and settlements are so nice and sharp.
In my opinion that's the main reason why it doesn't fit.

Seriously, i tried search in Internet, but i have no idea what are you saying I really want to understand to make a try.

Hmm really I'm don't think the height map fit the hand-drawn stuff :/ I would choose for one syle, not both...

That is right, till i wait and try understand what Freehand suggested i will just use it to help me in my topography, borders and texture

Ok here is some progress. I really like this thing, and thinking serious to follow this way.
Doing it, i found a terrible problem that cost me some time to find a solution. My full map is too big, when i insert my elements, i need to make the size very small and lose a lots of resolution, blurring all lines, tried make the full map in a bigger size [what mean 275% more]... FAIL! The file gots so big that was impossible to work, the memory file was running about 32gb ¬¬
The way that i found was just work with the paths. Made a file with the same size of my full map, adjusted to my desired 275% more, and started to draw with a small canvas, just using the big path as reference. With that i didn't lose my border's resolution and when fill the path i preserve all quality of my background stuff. The problem now is that i cant joint my regional maps, cos think that is impossible to use the same quality of details in 2 or more maps, my terrain blurring for example.
The solution that i found is work in 2 maps, one for the regional areas and other for my full map, where i will hide some details, like small towns, places and groups of mountains/ trees.

After all this, i noticed that my borders and rivers got really sux lines, make sense, since i used the same path shape 275% more. i will work ti fix it soon, at this point i was focused in use my icons and a blurring idea for terrain. Pls do not observe my borders for now, just the other elements.
The labels, when i imagined it was nice, but when started to set it in the map, i noticed that or i need to adapt the idea or isn't a good a idea. Check the the farm in the center... i just cant label it, no space for my arrow.
Need a opinion about the font of my text, i REALLY like this one, but want a second vision, in my last try with a low resolution it not look nice/ readable.

For now, i guess that it is all.

[- Max -]

Hey there. Well I must confess I didn't understand much what you said about your size and resolution troubles :/ but here's my opinion about that new update :
- ok I won't say anything about the borders
- Some shadows on the cliff give it a weird look. I'd re-work them since most of them doesn't really make sense.
- I'd add more contrast on colors (shade more, highlight more) on icons, moutains and such
- Outer glow labels are way too big. I don't think you need them so big to make the labels comfortbale to read. I'd really decrease size and maybe some opacity/or adjust colors.
- Hand written lfont styles are always hard for labeling maps but for some reason I'm used to see your maps and I think it fits your drawing style
- Not a great fan of the colors of fields. The pink/redish ones really attract eyes. Since this color isn't put verywhere else, I'd get rid of it and switch for a more harmonious one.
- I love the Oratory!

Kepp up the good job!

[Greason Wolfe]

I think what Freehand is trying to say (and I may be wrong) is that the contrast in styles from a 3d-like texture to the hand-drawn elements is rather jarring. The 3d-like texture looks more like a grainy photo over which sharper, hand-drawn elements have been placed. For me, that is distracting as I can't decide whether to focus on the texture or the hand-drawn elements. In this latest version, however, you've done a better job of merging the styles. The 3d-like texture is still there, but it is much more subtle, and doesn't pull attention away from the sharper, hand-drawn elements nearly as bad as in the previous version of the map. It is very difficult to balance two different styles in the same map, but you seem to be getting closer. Good luck, and don't give up.

GW

[aquarits]

Hey there. Well I must confess I didn't understand much what you said about your size and resolution troubles :/ but here's my opinion about that new update :

i made a picture to try explain better.
1.jpg
In the picture 1 i have my full shape, of the entire world. The size of the image is about 16k x 10k px, i think it is big lol, but dunno how to work with a different way. In my last trys, i was using this file to work with my regional maps, but wanted more definition in my icons and stuff.
My new icons are not appropriated for this.
Like i show in picture 2, when i resize the icons they practically disappear, i tried to draw in a small size, but cant get enough details, the solution was resize the shape. Like i said before, when i resize the entire shape, the file gets so bigger that make impossible to work.
In picture 3 i show the solution just working with the path. Thanks to details like blurring the terrain, i am not sure if i can joint the maps later, to make a world map.

- I'd add more contrast on colors (shade more, highlight more) on icons, moutains and such

for this i just adjusted the shadow in layer options, since i dont understand right what you mean adding more shade/highlight.

About the farms with red color, in begin i planned work just with green and yellow. But worrying farms with just 2 types of plantations i tried a 3rd color.
I must make a tribute for u Max, calling the cliffs something like "Cliffs of Pain" or "Terror Cliffs"
I re-shade it and hope it is nice now, was looking strange yes.

Thanks for the Oratory. This place is very important for all empires of the east. coz Dales usually hosts meetings for treaty, like the Southern treaty, holding the peace btw Fagacea and Hirkania, and the Prucia's treaty, forming a big kingdom making a unification with the 3 kingdoms of the north. All thos meetings passed in the Prucila's Oratory.

I think what Freehand is trying to say (and I may be wrong) is that the contrast in styles from a 3d-like texture to the hand-drawn elements is rather jarring. The 3d-like texture looks more like a grainy photo over which sharper, hand-drawn elements have been placed. For me, that is distracting as I can't decide whether to focus on the texture or the hand-drawn elements. In this latest version, however, you've done a better job of merging the styles. The 3d-like texture is still there, but it is much more subtle, and doesn't pull attention away from the sharper, hand-drawn elements nearly as bad as in the previous version of the map. It is very difficult to balance two different styles in the same map, but you seem to be getting closer. Good luck, and don't give up.

GW

Thank GW
I dont understand what Freehand said to do

Here some more progress

[aquarits]

This upgrade was very productive i guess.
I was wondering how to make the terrains colors get a sweet transition btw the different colors. I was blurring and smudging for ages and not happy with the results. For some reason i started erase the limits with lower opacity and bam! Some few touches and i got wut i wanted. Reducing the opacity of the Icons shadows opened my mind about the shadows that i used in the terrain to highlight the reliefs, i liked it and used in where my mountains start.

Problem now are my Labels, or i can say , still are. i dunno if i have to use a bigger size of font or what to do to make it better to read. I tried some changes in the outer glow but still not nice.
Guess now i will stop for a time till get more feed back, i have completed almost all of this area and still dont know how to call it in English. Where i need some help too

"Os Reinos Menores do Norte" - The Smaller Kingdoms North

"Smaller/ Small" is not sounding good for me, hope some opinions about it too.

Ty

[foremost]

I like the map, but a few suggestions for you:

1) Make the forest a little denser and perhaps add more shadow to it. I noticed that you did a better job on this in the North-Eastern forest zone but the southern one is especially light and open. Darkening the whole map in general might help too, but I think giving that forest area a murkier feel would help much more.

2) The farms look somewhat strange. : \ I don't think neon colors for the fields is the best way to go - maybe just some simple hatching would work better.

3) The map has a blue hue to it that sorta throws things little off. Again, perhaps once you darken things up it'll look better.

So pretty much the key to making this map even more perfect is to darken it. I like the land layout and most of the drawings you did - so there is certainly a good deal of excellent things on here, but I figure you have heard about those already

Good luck!

[aquarits]

Ty foremost, i appreciate your observations
Farms, annotated. I know that inst cool, but still trying find a better idea for farms.
For the trees just u saying that i noticed about density

BAHHH the bright!!! I just don't know how to balance it, every time that i change it i think that it is better, i just cant fell / compared what is better. I made 5 sets of bight/ contrast maybe someone help me to decide.

1.jpg

ty

[foremost]

I think brightness 15% with some contrast looks best, but I wouldn't go any brighter. That makes the trees look better too.

[- Max -]

Nice improvements here!
About contrast : I'd work on colors before adjusting any contrast (which doesn't make that much sense on your map with only a few color touch). It seems that you choose to color the map with some kind of brights colors (looking at the sea) so I'd go coloring the other areas of the map (lands, moutains, places of interest and so.)
I'd also get rid of the farms that looks too computer generated imho. I saw you want to steal my Green Havens one Go go go if you feel it fits your map!
Also I concur on forests, you should make then more dense in my opinion.
Btw good job overall