Voolf's miscellaneous art

[- JO -]

If I understand this correctly and you use 1px size brush, then that is indeed the problem. 1px brush will not have smooth edges, because there is no "room" for anti-aliasing of a brush.
I tend to use at least 3px size brush for lines. However I know that for icons on my maps it is too small. They do not look so good. I suggest using 3-5px sized brush for line work.
If it looks too thick, make the canvas along with the map bigger and then shrink the final image. It will look better.


If you ask about my maps, I do A2 or A3 at 300dpi (I never go higher than 300 dpi). It means that in theory I can print the map in good quality but it will be 3x smaller. In reality in can be printed 2x smaller and it still looks perfect. Digitally those 300dpi does not matter.

If you ask about the digital 3x bigger canvas, I cannot be sure how other do it, but I believe that they just make maps at their screen dpi or just round it too 100dpi (most screens have now 96dpi. Some older have 72dpi if i recall correctly).
So if an artist intents do make 3000 x 2000px digital map as a final product, they will multiply that x3, make canvas 9000 x 4000px at 100dpi. Then draw the map with bigger brushes and when it done shrink it 3x to 3000 x 2000px.

Thanks a lot for your answer !

As i see now, the problem is that I always start my maps (often A4, 300 dpi) with 4-6 pixel brushes, but as I go along, I add details, or I create thumbnails in which I try to draw cities, for example, and in these thumbnails, I often end up with 1 pixel brushes... Or in the details I want to add to the map: 1 pixel brushes.

I used to think that I was starting off on the wrong foot, with map sizes or resolutions that weren't big enough, but thanks to your answer, I've realised that it's a question of process: I need to define the elements I want to put in my map better from the outset... So, for example, I could draw the thumbnails at a good size, before ending up having to draw inside them with 1 pixel brushes.

I've also understood your explanation for drawing a map with the same resolution as the screen and reducing the size by a factor of three once the drawing's finished. I think I'll try that, at least for one map, to see what it does. In any case, thank you very much for these clarifications, they'll help me get off to a good start!

[Voolf]

This one is going to have a lot of labels. Something that I did not plan at the beginning at all.
There is more, but I will keep it until map is finished ;P

wip_1.6.jpg

[Voolf]

So the above map is finished and I was thinking about what kind of map should I do next.
In my to do/practice list I have got an atlas style map since way way back.

I decided to take a chunk of the map above I just finished and try to do it in atlas style.
Ala vorropohaiah. I do not want to try and copy his style, but most of those atlas style maps are quite similar...

Anyway, no wilbur, no gis, no anything for procedurally generated stuff. Just G.Projector to have a proper outline projection of the coastlines.
That means, everything will be hand drawn.
initially I though it will not be too hard. Oh boy was I wrong.
Making the elevation look natural is a tough nut to crack.

Spent many hours and got just this below.
And I am not too satisfied with it either, LOL

projekt 22.07.2023_wip1.1.jpg

[Ilanthar]

I did not find another way than hand drawing to get something that satisfies me (I tried a lot, though).
It's indeed a difficult exercise. I must confess I dropped partly the contour lines (I tend to add them afterward).
I found that determine the ridge line then work from the coastlines & rivers, narrowing to the ridge line is a good way to proceed, at least for me.

[Voolf]

I did not find another way than hand drawing to get something that satisfies me (I tried a lot, though).
It's indeed a difficult exercise. I must confess I dropped partly the contour lines (I tend to add them afterward).
I found that determine the ridge line then work from the coastlines & rivers, narrowing to the ridge line is a good way to proceed, at least for me.

Thank you for this invaluable advice. At some point I wa also thinking I made mistake starting from mountains. (habit of drawing regular fantasy maps)
I think I will start anew from coastlines and rivers. After all rivers will help me with right elevation shaping too.

[Voolf]

Okay I think I am going in the right direction now.
Not sure how "accurate" so to speak the elevation looks like,
but it looks good enough for me considering it is my first attempt at this style.

Working on the 8th land elevation layer now. I think I will make about 11?
Then i have to correct rivers and edit some land here and there.

projekt 22.07.2023_wip1.2.jpg

[ThomasR]

The many folds of your relief are very consistent with how you do your shaded relief, that's one for your style that really shines in a new medium, kudos for that. Secondly, this styl makes for a very organic transition between levels and it's very nice to the eye. All in all, that's pretty classy !

[Chashio]

That's looking nice, Voolf

[ChickPea]

This is really impressive given that you're hand-drawing it!

[Ilanthar]

By Voolf
Thank you for this invaluable advice

You're most welcome! Glad if it helps.
And by what I see, you're definitely on good tracks.