Gigantica -- A Study in Maximum Habitable Planet Size

[Naima]

Personally, even if I had a supercomputer outfitted with the most accurate climate modelling software available, I still wouldn't be completely satisfied because the tectonics--the foundation on which my conworld lies--is based on my very simplistic understanding of the subject. I'm sure this is Charerg's specialty, but in my case I have to confess my ignorance about whether the tectonic history I've depicted for Gigantica is plausible. I have over a dozen plates moving in various directions, but would those motions actually occur in real life on a planet so different from the Earth? Because I can't be certain, I'm not inclined to max out on the climatological accuracy, although perhaps in the future, when I've learned more of the science, this will change. Personally, I would appreciate a program that could simulate plate tectonics like Tectonics.js, but with much better resolution and accuracy. However, that kind of ruins the fun of worldsmithing.

Here's another rendering of my first continent, which I'm continuing to develop due to a little bout of perfectionism. Thank you Turambar and Naima for the feedback regarding the "erodedness" of my mountains. I've taken that into consideration and significantly reduced my iterations of precipitation erosion. I'm wondering if this is perhaps an improvement over the last, although I'm still in doubt over the continental shelves and bathymetry.

Attachment 133860

Let me know.

Peter

I think now are perfect what algorythm did you use for those?

As for the shelves I think depends on the direction of the tectonic movements and if there are other continents around.

[Peter Toth]

Thank you Turambar and Naima for the feedback!

Since the last post, I've modified my topography algorithm considerably, spending many long nights on this supremely rewarding hobby. Persevering with this algorithm required numerous sources of inspiration, namely the works of MrBragg, Tiluchi, and Harrg on this site, and the World of Oor on Reddit. Many thanks to all of you for your work and your critiques!

Here's the second continent on the world of Gigantica: Elias!

Regarding "Gigantica," I'm considering changing the name to "Grandissimo" or "Nagyobb," simply because Gigantica sounds much too prosaic. (The second name is the Hungarian word for "bigger.")

Elias Two.png

At any rate, please let me know what you think.

Thanks,

Peter

[Naima]

Thank you Turambar and Naima for the feedback!

Since the last post, I've modified my topography algorithm considerably, spending many long nights on this supremely rewarding hobby. Persevering with this algorithm required numerous sources of inspiration, namely the works of MrBragg, Tiluchi, and Harrg on this site, and the World of Oor on Reddit. Many thanks to all of you for your work and your critiques!

Here's the second continent on the world of Gigantica: Elias!

Regarding "Gigantica," I'm considering changing the name to "Grandissimo" or "Nagyobb," simply because Gigantica sounds much too prosaic. (The second name is the Hungarian word for "bigger.")

Elias Two.png

At any rate, please let me know what you think.

Thanks,

Peter

To me is perfect now, what algorithm did you use?

[MrBragg]

I agree with Naima and also think this looks really really good, congrats! If you want a very minor nitpick--and it is minor--it's that some areas of your mountains seem to have higher detail than other parts. This is most noticeable where the clear, clean ridges exist next to areas of highlands that look much more finely eroded, like in that range in the north of the main landmass.

[Harrg]

I agree with Naima and also think this looks really really good, congrats! If you want a very minor nitpick--and it is minor--it's that some areas of your mountains seem to have higher detail than other parts. This is most noticeable where the clear, clean ridges exist next to areas of highlands that look much more finely eroded, like in that range in the north of the main landmass.

Agree with MrBragg. U can easy fix it if put new black-white height map on top of ur based layer and than changet it by curve. Mask places, that u whant save.

[Peter Toth]

Thank you Naima, MrBragg and Harrg for the compliments. My process is very complex and still doesn't yield predictable results, but I basically start in Photoshop, where I draw the basic mountain shapes using a modified mountain brush. I import the resultant image into Wilbur and do several iterations of incise flow and precipitation erosion, then import the changes back into Photoshop to fiddle with the blending mode; then I mask areas, such as deserts, that experience sparse erosion. Then it's back into Wilbur for another round of incise flow and precipitation, repeated several times over. I switch between Wilbur and Photoshop a dozen times before the final product emerges. One day I'll definitely publish a tutorial on this method, but for now it's very experimental.

I believe, MrBragg, due to layer masks activated to simulate desert topography, much detail from repeated Wilbur erosion passes has been removed from the image. This is probably why certain regions appear less detailed than others.

Here's an experimental map of my third continent, shown with a rotated globe whose north pole is located at upper left.

Rotated Continent 3 smaller 2.png

Now here is an equirectangular view of the same continent, with north at top (notice the distortion):

Equirectangular Continent 3 smaller.png

Hope you enjoy.

Peter

[Harrg]

You show very good results. I like it. U use native wilbur texture? I see you do some pretty contrasting transitions between heights to make nice wilbur shading. I used to do the same until I understood the main idea. You can separately accentuate hills, shallow valleys and mountains without using wilbur shading (which is good).I watched how they make shading for real maps and realized that it gives a lot more room for creativity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1XPbXkRwM

[Turambar]

Thank you Naima, MrBragg and Harrg for the compliments. My process is very complex and still doesn't yield predictable results, but I basically start in Photoshop, where I draw the basic mountain shapes using a modified mountain brush. I import the resultant image into Wilbur and do several iterations of incise flow and precipitation erosion, then import the changes back into Photoshop to fiddle with the blending mode; then I mask areas, such as deserts, that experience sparse erosion. Then it's back into Wilbur for another round of incise flow and precipitation, repeated several times over. I switch between Wilbur and Photoshop a dozen times before the final product emerges. One day I'll definitely publish a tutorial on this method, but for now it's very experimental.

I believe, MrBragg, due to layer masks activated to simulate desert topography, much detail from repeated Wilbur erosion passes has been removed from the image. This is probably why certain regions appear less detailed than others.

Here's an experimental map of my third continent, shown with a rotated globe whose north pole is located at upper left.

Rotated Continent 3 smaller 2.png

Now here is an equirectangular view of the same continent, with north at top (notice the distortion):

Equirectangular Continent 3 smaller.png

Hope you enjoy.

Peter

This looks great! You mentioned you use a modified mountain brush in photoshop. Did you create this yourself based off real-world heightmaps?

[Naima]

Thank you Naima, MrBragg and Harrg for the compliments. My process is very complex and still doesn't yield predictable results, but I basically start in Photoshop, where I draw the basic mountain shapes using a modified mountain brush. I import the resultant image into Wilbur and do several iterations of incise flow and precipitation erosion, then import the changes back into Photoshop to fiddle with the blending mode; then I mask areas, such as deserts, that experience sparse erosion. Then it's back into Wilbur for another round of incise flow and precipitation, repeated several times over. I switch between Wilbur and Photoshop a dozen times before the final product emerges. One day I'll definitely publish a tutorial on this method, but for now it's very experimental.

I believe, MrBragg, due to layer masks activated to simulate desert topography, much detail from repeated Wilbur erosion passes has been removed from the image. This is probably why certain regions appear less detailed than others.

Here's an experimental map of my third continent, shown with a rotated globe whose north pole is located at upper left.

Rotated Continent 3 smaller 2.png

Now here is an equirectangular view of the same continent, with north at top (notice the distortion):

Equirectangular Continent 3 smaller.png

Hope you enjoy.

Peter

Looks good, only thing I would pay attention to the erosion in some areas as they seem to create River-Fjords that are probably as big as huge Canyons.

[Peter Toth]

Thank you Harrg, for that informative video; in the future, I certainly will aspire to accentuate my hills and mountains separately using the mentioned algorithm.

Thanks Turambar! To create my Photoshop brush, I simply drew a radially symmetric mountain in Wilbur at low resolution and eroded slopes into it using several iterations of Incise Flow and Precipitation. I then imported it as a brush into Photoshop.

Thanks Naima, for noticing the issue with the fjords; I completely failed to notice their immense size, especially considering the planet has 33% more surface area than the Earth.

Now, having (hopefully) learned from my mistakes, I'm set to engage in some exciting conworlding...