1982 [Quenched]

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:04 am

Was not happy with aspects of the updated version, so tinkered with it.

Click image to enlarge.

isaiah40 · Post by **isaiah40** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:58 am

The outline and borders are still pixelated really bad. They looked good a couple of versions ago.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:05 am

Yeah, why don't you revert back to those borders? I don't even get why you changed them again after you managed to get them so good.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:39 am

I did a stupid thing and changed those borders. No idea why as they where good. It was during the redo of the map and for some reason did not copy the procedure. This should put it to bed now. I hope that is.

Click image to enlarge.

If there are no objections then, I will make a start on the small map.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:02 pm

Um... looks like all you did was blur your current borders?

Why don't you try the method of converting selection to path & stroking the path. This is the best way to get smooth borders, besides drawing them freehand with a tablet.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:14 pm

natty_dread wrote:Um... looks like all you did was blur your current borders?

Why don't you try the method of converting selection to path & stroking the path. This is the best way to get smooth borders, besides drawing them freehand with a tablet.

Thank you natty. Was racking my brains on how I did it before.

Click image to enlarge.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:17 pm

koontz1973 wrote:Thank you natty. Was racking my brains on how I did it before.

Well why didn't you just look for the post in this thread where I told you of the method the first time?

Anyway, the new borders look pretty smooth. Now the only thing is, the bevel doesn't match them in every place... so now convert the path back to selection, and use that selection to make a new bevel.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:06 pm

Fixed

Click image to enlarge.

Flapcake · Post by **Flapcake** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:58 pm

Hi Koontz, its been a while since I have takin a look at your falkland map, and what a progress its have been through.
I do have some comments,

Tha mines looks realy nice now.
borders/lines super smooth, cool.
color scene, much better with dampened ground colors.
Ships looking nice, but Im not sure about both sides having same ships, would be nice if they dident looked the same.
mountains looks realy good.
Trees, hmm (yes just hmm)
Title, its not so much the burning/flames, I think its the font you using i dont like.

But as I use to say, its my personal opinion, and my conclusion is, overall a damm fine piece of work

all for now
Flap

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:04 am

Flapcake wrote:Hi Koontz, its been a while since I have takin a look at your falkland map, and what a progress its have been through.
I do have some comments,

Tha mines looks realy nice now.
borders/lines super smooth, cool.
color scene, much better with dampened ground colors.
Ships looking nice, but Im not sure about both sides having same ships, would be nice if they dident looked the same.
mountains looks realy good.
Trees, hmm (yes just hmm)
Title, its not so much the burning/flames, I think its the font you using i dont like.

But as I use to say, its my personal opinion, and my conclusion is, overall a damm fine piece of work
all for now
Flap

Nice to see you still looking forward to this Flap.
Mines - thanks, your suggestion to take them back to the original.
borders - should know how to do these by now but it is always they bitch or remembering how.
Ships - thanks, both sides had the same type, in fact, both sides had a sister ship in the conflict. Argentinian forces bought a lot of UK warships as well as American.
Mountains and forests, this is the one thing no one will agree on.
Title, will look at the font.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:49 am

About time to update the small image now that most things are sorted.
Map Image : Large

Click image to enlarge.

Map Image : Small

Click image to enlarge.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:27 am

Hm... I have to say, I'm sorry but I'm still not quite happy with the mountains, or the forests. Those brown things around the mountains look kinda ugly, they make the mountains look more like festering wounds... so either you should find a way to make them blend with the land more or find another style for them.

The forests look a bit too flat and plastic, I think you need to make them less glossy and more bushy.

QoH · Post by **QoH** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:51 am

Trees look like moss imo

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:56 am

New forests and blended the mountains into the surroundings more.

Click image to enlarge.

QoH wrote:Trees look like moss imo

You have some funny looking moss where you live them

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:18 pm

What I mean about blending them in is that the brown colour of the mountains should be blending with the land colour...

The forests are improved, but still not quite there... try making the texture a bit smoother.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:13 pm

Large

Click image to enlarge.

Small

Click image to enlarge.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:42 pm

Large

Click image to enlarge.

Small

Click image to enlarge.

Sorted out things and fixed slight problems with the small.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:51 pm

I'm sorry to be saying this, but I'm still not convinced about the mountains... perhaps you should try a different style for them? Try them without that brown ring around them. Or at least make it thinner.

Also, the forest texture isn't quite there yet... try making it softer. It looks a bit too hard.

QoH · Post by **QoH** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:26 am

IMO, something needs to be done about the plane images.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:49 am

QoH wrote:IMO, something needs to be done about the plane images.

Why, what's wrong with them? They are correct colouring and type of aircraft used in the conflict. They also fit the map.

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

Thats it for the mountain. natty, I know you do not like them but I do. I have blended, shaped, coloured the works on them. It is one of those cases that what you do not like, I do. There for unless the mods come in and say the map will not go on with the current mountains, then they will stay. As for the trees, I have flattened them some and do not want to go any more or they start to look flat.

QoH · Post by **QoH** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:51 am

They look too cartoonish to me, but that's my opinion.

Also, are the attack arrows supposed to be different sizes? I think it might look more... i can't find the right word here... I guess sleek? if they are slimmer.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:58 am

QoH wrote:They look too cartoonish to me, but that's my opinion.

Also, are the attack arrows supposed to be different sizes? I think it might look more... i can't find the right word here... I guess sleek? if they are slimmer.

Thanks, will try to muddy the aircraft up some. As for the arrows, only one is a different length. But I can make them slimmer.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:01 am

koontz1973 wrote:It is one of those cases that what you do not like, I do. There for unless the mods come in and say the map will not go on with the current mountains, then they will stay.

That's not how this works and you should know it, you've already made one map through the foundry. You can't just say "well unless the mods tell me to do it I won't do it". You shouldn't just listen to the mods, you should listen to everyone. The mods aren't the final arbiters of what is acceptable quality, they should only enforce the view of the foundry community.

I know the foundry standards have been loosened lately, but a map shouldn't be stamped just because it's spent a certain time in the main foundry. You should do everything in your power to make the graphics great. You shouldn't settle for just "ok", you should push your own limits and try to create something better than what you're capable of.

Examples: When I made the nordic countries revamp, I redid the mountains like 7 times or something. I could have stopped midway through and told everyone "nah, I'm not going to change them, I like them" but I kept on working them and finally they were good.

Another example, on my Eurasia map currently, I could have stayed with the old graphical style, but then I decided to take it up a notch and make something that wouldn't be just "ok".

I think, you have the skill to take your graphics to a higher level here. In fact I'd almost suggest you to redo the entire grahics of this map and see where it takes you. Surely you've developed some extra skill since you started working on this.

Remember, I'm only trying to get you to push yourself because I think you have potential to be a great graphics artist - you're willing to experiment and learn new things, which is the most important thing in becoming a skilled graphician IMO (some artistic eye also helps, though).

Also: the borders between the sea territories don't look that good. They're too thick and blurry... maybe you try making them sharper.

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:23 am

natty_dread wrote:That's not how this works and you should know it, you've already made one map through the foundry. You can't just say "well unless the mods tell me to do it I won't do it". You shouldn't just listen to the mods, you should listen to everyone. The mods aren't the final arbiters of what is acceptable quality, they should only enforce the view of the foundry community.

I have listened to you, but I fell the mountains are not going to get any better.

I know the foundry standards have been loosened lately, but a map shouldn't be stamped just because it's spent a certain time in the main foundry. You should do everything in your power to make the graphics great. You shouldn't settle for just "ok", you should push your own limits and try to create something better than what you're capable of.

I am not settling for OK, I am settling for what I feel is great. Like all maps, not everyone will agree on a certain style or aspect of the map.

Examples: When I made the nordic countries revamp, I redid the mountains like 7 times or something. I could have stopped midway through and told everyone "nah, I'm not going to change them, I like them" but I kept on working them and finally they were good.

That is great for you and I have done these ones over and over again. Just because I have not posted here every single version of mountain does not mean I have sat back and done nothing. Come on natty, even you throw about the scrap the map tantrum now and again. London comes to mind so even though I know you are only trying to get me to give the best, but try to give a little lei way now and again.

Another example, on my Eurasia map currently, I could have stayed with the old graphical style, but then I decided to take it up a notch and make something that wouldn't be just "ok".

And not everyone agrees with your decision to do that. Personally I think it looks great.

I think, you have the skill to take your graphics to a higher level here. In fact I'd almost suggest you to redo the entire grahics of this map and see where it takes you. Surely you've developed some extra skill since you started working on this.

I have learnt a great deal over the last few months, but redo the whole map

No way, there is a look I wanted and found it from the earliest drafts. Fine tuning that image is taking a while but no way does this need a complete redraw.

Remember, I'm only trying to get you to push yourself because I think you have potential to be a great graphics artist - you're willing to experiment and learn new things, which is the most important thing in becoming a skilled graphician IMO (some artistic eye also helps, though).

Thank you. But you should of left this paragraph to the end. Knock me down and then use this to pick me up.

Also: the borders between the sea territories don't look that good. They're too thick and blurry... maybe you try making them sharper.

That I can fix. They are very similar to the sea colouring and the feathering is to large.

natty, I am not trying to be awkward over the mountains or the forest, am I am happy to keep going with them to make them, nicer. I will be doing that anyway the same as you do on maps, refining and retuning them but I am not going to concentrate on them solely. It might help if you tell me specifically what you think might work (give an example) and I can have a go. The same with the forests. I am over the moon happy with them, far more than the mountains and would be a shame to lose them, but as always, let me know what you want and I can mock it up. If I get stuck, I will then ask for help. As long as you do not ask for DiMs alien vomit look.

Now for Qoh.
How it this for the planes and arrows.

Click image to enlarge.

natty dread · Post by **natty dread** » Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:03 am

koontz1973 wrote:I am not settling for OK, I am settling for what I feel is great. Like all maps, not everyone will agree on a certain style or aspect of the map.

I hate to break it you, but currently, this map image is not great. It looks nice and all, but I feel like you have the potential to make it so much better.

Remember, you don't want to look back a year from now and cringe when you look at this map, thinking to yourself "oh if only I had spent some more time working on the graphics"...

koontz1973 wrote:I have learnt a great deal over the last few months, but redo the whole map No way, there is a look I wanted and found it from the earliest drafts. Fine tuning that image is taking a while but no way does this need a complete redraw.

Sometimes it helps to do that even if you're happy with the current image. You should never be afraid to scrap what you have and start from scratch - it won't take as long as the first time, since you can use elements from the first image, and you have all the borders etc. all figured out. You can use the path you created for the land borders to quickly create a new land shape, and grab all the essential layers like the bonus area colours from your first image, then just concentrate on the borders, textures, etc.

I know it feels like it's a lot of work and you're throwing lots of work away, but in fact it's not like that - the work you've done previously doesn't go to waste, after all it helps you to get to your final destination...

Hey, speaking of the london map... I made like 4 different graphics for that map, each one a totally new one with new borders, lands etc. And look at Redbaron's Philadelphia, he's already done at least 3 different graphics for it.

As for the mountains etc... I'll think of something later today, now I have to go do christmas stuff...

1982 [Quenched]

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/10

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [4/12] Latest images Page 1/11

Re: 1982 [23/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [23/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [23/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [23/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [24/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [24/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [23/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [23/12] Latest images Page 1/12

Re: 1982 [24/12] Latest images Page 1/12