[CWBP2] World Map construction thread

[Azélor]

According to my poor understanding of the histogram on a sinusoidal projection of that we have 75 % water which seems good to me. I was actually going to suggest we increase the sea area between the two "halves" of the world but given that we are already 75% I don't think it's a good idea. My concern was exploration, but according to my calculations the closest piece of lands between the half's is like 3000 km apart, which is more than acceptable in terms of difficulty.

75% Is lower than what we have on Earth so maybe we could increase it a little. It used to be higher but some islands got deleted and moving landmasses closer to the poles also lower it.

3000 KM and the closest islands are easy to miss without sufficient knowledge of the area.

About the archipelagos, one of them appear 2 times. Do you prefer 1 or 2? They can be modified to match with the rest. We can keep both but one of them will have to be modified.

Edit: There are also a hell of a lot of islands as a result of my messy editing. Should we remove them or leave them?
I wasn't sure what was the purpose. I guess we need islands but I'm not sure where to put them. Maybe small islands should be left for later, or for the individual mappers to decide. For sure, putting islands everywhere is not realistic. We need deep waters not just shallow oceans. But as weird as it sounds, making good islands is not always easy. Especially if you need a lot. We could keep them on a separate layer.

Edit2: Given your image is at the top resolution I think we can just use that and clean up the land edges do you have one without the notes?
No, right now my image is the same you used at first. It's in 72 DPI. To make it at 300 dpi you either need to make the map smaller by 4.16 times and then change resolution to 300 (that will stretch back to original pixel dimension with a huge loss in quality) or do another one from scratch (it's what I intended to do anyway). Also, I'm surprised that the map appear normally here since 50 megapixels exceed the limit. I guess that the resolution is also considered.
At 300 DPI, we could go up to 7700 by 3850.

[Falconius]

Just a really quick scribble for tectonics suggestion: blue lines are faults red arrows direction of moment on edge.Tectonics suggestions1.jpg

[Azélor]

and apparently, considering that we need to delete some island but also add others that have holes inside, we have around 25% of land (24,8 exactly ). It's a difference of 8,3% form earth, and roughly the size of North America. Sorry, I'm just surprised that we should add a whole continent while it's seems fine. It's the size of the central eastern continent, excluding surrounding islands but including that most gaps are filled. look it's the size of the orange spot:

Attachment 66351

There is enough room for a new continent if you are interested.

[Falconius]

I really like that Northern sea actually, I'd like to keep it as is personally. Perhaps we could find room for something half the size of that orange circle somewhere else? Maybe put in a small continent and the long islands back in the SE corner? As far as I'm concerned we don't need to bring it up to Earth standard, I'm fine with having comparably less land than we do on earth Earth, but not more. TBH I like the map as is though. Maybe we can keep a lost or wandering continent for later?

As for the islands we can leave them or separate them to a new layer for now and then when we get the tectonics down edit them according to what seems reasonably geographicly reasonable. Except for the moon island you moved to the direct centre of the map, that needs to stay.

I think Thurlor's South pole island needs to move north a bit or get squished a bit as it gets too elongated on the orthographic projection.

I really don't understand the resolution stuff so much clearly, so whatever is reasonable is what we should do. I don't understand what difference the dpi has to do with what is on screen (ie the pixel count), I thought it only had an effect regarding printing.

Are you really planning on doing one from scratch? Seems like a greater amount of work than necessary for a map only intended to give very general details.

[Azélor]

Right, I don't need the HD map now. I need to wait after the tectonic map, because it's possible that we need to adapt the map. But I would like to do it before the mapping frenzy.

It's possible to gain some land here and there. For example, I filled some gaps in the north pole (covered by ice anyway) and some holes in the east central continent. I don't know if they were intended or not.
Attachment 66355

Or I could let some gap one to create some passages like we can see here :
Attachment 66356

We still have a smaller continent in the east almost touching the other one.

[Falconius]

I tried to avoid filling things that I thought interesting because we do need some significant inland bodies of water. Earth has the Great Lakes, lake Victoria, the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea. Just look at the Canadian shield its riddled with very large lakes.

Perhaps we can modify your original suggestion and put stuff in the blue blob and put those super long islands next to it?
New Co-op proposal suggest1.jpg

[Azélor]

I know we need lakes, it just looked better without them.

Attachment 66363

and no I think it's better to left that spot empty for now at least.

some Islands in the south are probably too small and do not match well with the rest.
Thurlor is still too close from the pole.

[Falconius]

Hmm I thought it looked good with them. They resulted from mashing around landmasses not too dissimilar from tectonic activity if it's any comfort I found that trying to put them in afterwards they never looked right, so when they occurred "naturally" I decided to leave em.

Yeah I think you are right about that blue spot, for some reason I find that empty area in the North sea really compelling.

You've done a lot of work cleaning it up, thank you.

[Azélor]

I did some tests with the tectonic and relief based on the maps submitted. It's possible to split some plates and change direction. Also, feel free to comment about the elevation or relief map. I'm not too sure what it is, but when it's done we could do a proper elevation map with 5 to 10 levels or a bit more if we also include ocean depths. 3 would be enough for the ocean. By elevation map, I mean something between this and this http://www.cartographersguild.com/at...telcolored.png
so something like the fractal terrain map : http://www.cartographersguild.com/at...onc_plates.png

Plate 1 ? could be on plate 1,2 or on it's own plate. Keeping it on plate 1 is the worst option I think.
? is because I'm not sure if they deserve their own plates. Your continent (closest to the center) share similarities with the rest of plate 2 and Thurlor (by default) do not have any particular land features (no mountains).
2 ? probably deserve it's own plate, mostly an oceanic plate covering the north sea and much of the pole. The drifting direction could change.
Should plate 1 direction change toward the south?


Attachment 66383

[Falconius]

Don't know about the elevations just yet. I'm curious why you filled the inlet in the north pole?

Here is a tectonic suggestion based off of yours:
Tectonic activity suggest1.jpg
Plate 5, 7, and 11 are moving in a bit of a spin, 5 is in a heavy spin.

Also I moved the Thurlor Spray islands in the SE corner a bit farther north as they suffer greatly in projection compression. As an approach to the plates I think if we do too many and then fuse those we deem unnecessary it might be a more workable option?