JustSarah Posted November 24, 2013 Report Share Posted November 24, 2013 When one is going for a more realistic effect when drawing mountains, is it considered more effective to use a gradient feature? In my original map, I actually draw mountains like points, that taper off semi-circularly. But when I did my elevator map (ground elevation other than mountains) I ended up creating a sort of gradient feature that a separate between low altitude to highest altitude with a color scale. (So darker shades would be the highest mountains, while lighter shades would be lower elevations. It wasn't really intentional, but I ended up drawing a large mountain partially blocking access to the castle on the map. (In the original, elevation didn't really come into the picture. It was flat.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Fiend Posted November 24, 2013 Report Share Posted November 24, 2013 I'm not artistically inclined at all, I can't draw worth crap. So for my map making Ive been using Campaign Cartographers 3. im still pretty new to it, and it seems pretty basic overall. I dont even think it has technical elevation mapping.But mapping mountains always is hard for me. Trying to make a 'natural' looking mountain chain, trying to take actual geographical facts into account and whatnot (plate tectonics, etc.). And then mapping rivers that flow from mountains and lakes and stuff. I always take too much time trying to create that 'perfect' detail. Doesnt usually work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.