For me personally I have found that if I want to do a realistic map that raster is much better. For simple/fast maps though vector is the preferred choice (as you can spit out a basic map much easier with it).
For me personally I have found that if I want to do a realistic map that raster is much better. For simple/fast maps though vector is the preferred choice (as you can spit out a basic map much easier with it).
I disagree!
Hey Nomadic, I have to disagree... the following map is already posted in my Paizo Map Attempt thread in the Building WIP forum, however, I am posting it again for emphasis.Originally Posted by Nomadic
The following map was completely created in Xara Xtreme, with never touching a raster application. Xara Xtreme Pro 3.2 is a vector application - with some powerful features.
Everything is vector shapes with raster image fills, feathering, different transparency filters applied, bevels and shadows. Only 1 hour of work in this!
Again, the Bogwood Swamp - Kingdom of Flies! (a vector created map!)
Thoughts!
GP
Gamer Printshop Publishing, Starfinder RPG modules and supplements, Map Products, Map Symbol Sets and Map Making Tutorial Guide
DrivethruRPG store
Artstation Gallery - Maps and 3D illustrations
I have to disagree with this in turn. Firstly though I have to point out that what I was talking about was in regards to me. My mapping style is one that makes higher quality stuff with raster but works faster in vector. Secondly, as nice as xara is I actually prefer the look of maps done in photoshop/gimp as they tend to flow more naturally. This of course isn't a hit against you as you do great work. I have noticed though that most vector maps can't get stuff to flow right. An example here would be within your map the artificially sharp mountain peaks and the way that textures suddenly turn into other textures. Vector isn't good at realism, but it is good at simplicity and cleanliness (it is for this reason that I do my cartoonography in vector programs).
There are raster operations and vector operations and Xara can do both. If it loads in bitmaps and textures with them then its doing raster operations. Xara is a hybrid app. Although PSP, PS, Gimp are all hybrids too, I think Xara has what appears to be the best hybrid operations in its class. But you cant say that Xara is a purely vector app because your map is painting pixels by looking up into a bitmapped texture source - even if the shape your texturing is a vector shape that still essentially a raster operation. You can definitively say its a raster operation when you scale an image huge and it pixellates. Neither vector or raster is better in absolute terms they are just different. Some operations are easier to do vector and some raster. Having an app which does both does mean that you don't need to learn two apps but the point is that you need to know which operations are easy in either case. You can draw a line in raster apps and you can fill with pure vector patterns too and sometimes thats the right thing to do and other times its not so good but most would agree that its easier to draw and modify a line in a vector app and a patterns in a raster app. I don't think that its necessarily true that quick or realistic is the right split to say vector or raster as you can do either in either type of operation but some things are quicker in vector and some things and quicker in raster and likewise for realism too. Some things are easy to do in 3D and some things are really hard unless you do them in 3D - its just right tool for the job.
True, but just to pipe in here again for a second. Again, I am talking about what works for me. For me my realistic maps are better in raster, but I can do maps faster in vector. That's not an opinion, it is a fact based on knowing how I work (and I am obviously going to know how I work better than anyone else just the same as they know how they work better than I do).
Reply With Quote
