Reply With Quote
Thank you all you guys!
@Eilathen : I can't really say anything about the forests, I guess it's matter of taste
I love that style! A simple yet beautiful map. Have a Like (i can't rep you, yet).
As always with commissions, i wish we could see a higher res.
One problem i have with this style (at least at this "zoom"-level aka resolution) : The forests are not pronounced enough ...at this view-level, they are not convincing enough for me.
I'm trapped in Darkness,
Still I reach out for the Stars
Thank you all you guys!
@Eilathen : I can't really say anything about the forests, I guess it's matter of taste
I'm not sure "it's a matter of taste" is applicable to every critic and comment i make
On a more serious note - I am not sure you understood me correctly. I do like the style per se (so it is "to my taste"!)...i just think you should make it "pop" a little more (as in "stand out more"). Especially in the left-hand version, the forests are almost invisible (to exaggerate a bit). On the b/w version it is a definitely better but i'd still wish that they'd be a bit more pronounced...i mean forests are as important a landmark as mountains, are they not? And your mountains are very sharply detailed and clear...and not as fuzzy, "invisible" as the forests.
I hope that describes it more clearly what i meant?
I'm trapped in Darkness,
Still I reach out for the Stars
Thanks Ravells, glad you like it
@ Eilathen : What I meant is that, on that style, I didn't want to emphasis trees sizes and rather did a forest style that match the scale of the mountains. So you probably don't like this kind of forest that much, hence "matter of taste"
@ Max - I was not talking about the tree sizes. Just about the coloration or clearness of the pattern you used for the forests. Especially in the sepia map. I just think that as it stands the two landmark-elements (aka Mountains and trees) have very different emphasis. That has nothing to do with taste.
As i said, this problem is much less pronounced in the grey-scale map...therefore the grey-scale one is much more to my liking.
For visibility - i guess if i could look at the full res map i would also think they are visible enough
I'm trapped in Darkness,
Still I reach out for the Stars
I don't know. Actially I like these forests combined with the Mountains and agree with hin regarding skale.
Hehe thanks, I wish I hadn't spend so much time on other jobs for years but well...Originally Posted by ravells
Max...you were born to this profession.
The greyscale version will be in the book so I guess it's a good thing@ Max - I was not talking about the tree sizes. Just about the coloration or clearness of the pattern you used for the forests. Especially in the sepia map. I just think that as it stands the two landmark-elements (aka Mountains and trees) have very different emphasis. That has nothing to do with taste.
As i said, this problem is much less pronounced in the grey-scale map...therefore the grey-scale one is much more to my liking.
For visibility - i guess if i could look at the full res map i would also think they are visible enoughAnyway, I got your point on the visibility, the forests might look a bit fuzzy but I kind of like it
If I remember right, you were probably the first to see the building of this forest style when I made Northern Kerash map
Yes, I did comment on its shade and recommedated to make them a bit more bold, which you did. I value our conversations while mapping and am glad to give feedback as like to ask for that myself. Keep the good work on.
Posting Permissions
