How do you draw tiny islands?

[Jean-Abdel]

In my world I've got plenty of tiny islands no bigger than the tip of my pen but they form a giant archipelago thousands of kilometers long so they are quite important for animals and human migration, as well as oceanic current. Should I draw a continuous line (they're pretty close to each other) or just put points randomly alongside the line formed by the archipelago ? I'm drawing on good ol' paper so I can't just zoom in to draw those islands.

[SteffenBrand]

Hey, welcome to CG! =)

Sometimes cartographers draw a second line off the coast into the water, like here in the attachment. It bundles everything together a bit better. You could draw them in tiny as they are and indicate the land mass this way, since it is the logical way to continue the line. OR: You could just zoom-in the area and have a more detailed shot of the area. OR: Go for a more schematic depiction / art style. OR: Have descriptors along the route in form of text (my least favorite thing if it doesn't happen all over the map).

Bildschirmfoto 2018-09-16 um 13.41.48.png

[Wingshaw]

Steffen's ideas are good, but I think there's another method: simply mark the islands as dots. Larger dots for larger islands, and smaller dots for smaller islands. This map of the Pacific shows the effect I'd recommend: link

But that's my opinion and preference, so feel free to disagree
Wingshaw

[SteffenBrand]

Wingshaw has a point, depending on your style this is an additional route you could go. =)

[Gamerprinter]

Sometimes I show the largest islands, then label the area with a larger label to show an archipelago, then don't actually draw all the tiny isles.

[Jean-Abdel]

I think I'll go for a Sci-Fi style, though I'm not sure how would elevation appear scince it's pretty important for my story, Maybe Dark green for lowland forest and lighter one for highlands' ones?

[Caenwyr]

I don't think you'll be able to show the elevation of these tiny islands if they're just a pen-nib across (would this be the analog variant of a pixel?). At that size, you bump into choices you usually don't have to make: you either have to go for realism (with tiny islands that won't allow you to show anything else except their existence) or symbolism (where you size the islands up artificially so you can draw in more details). Personally I'd never go for the latter option, but there's also other possibilities:

If these are important enough, why don't you create an insert zooming in on the region, maybe even with a sideways view with exaggerated Z-axis? You could put the insert near the border of the map, or even in the middle of the ocean, with tiny lines indicating which region they're showing?

[Redrobes]

A map is always a restriction of information about the real land. A map is a choice of what information to convey. Its up to you to decide what information that is. Whether a map is a good one or not is not by how artistic or colourful it is but whether it conveys the information is claims to show in a clear and concise fashion. And no map will contain every bit of information about everything. If the aim is to show the migratory routes, ocean currents, or elevation then it may not need to show each individual island. Many maps of earth for example show the barrier reefs as a continuous splodge because for most people its boundary and extents are more important than knowing each little bit of it. I think you must ask yourself first what is the important information that needs to be described and then focus on showing that well and not be afraid to reduce the accuracy of other items like exact island shape when it would interfere with showing your primary information.