What did you think of the last update?Big Mac wrote:Yay! That is exactly how I wanted it. Thanks Alejandro!
- Alejandro
Moderator: Kyete
What did you think of the last update?Big Mac wrote:Yay! That is exactly how I wanted it. Thanks Alejandro!
I just saw it! It is amazing.Kanchou wrote:What did you think of the last update?Big Mac wrote:Yay! That is exactly how I wanted it. Thanks Alejandro!
I've just found my old reply to the "Mapping the planets of Spelljammer" topic at the SJ forum at The Piazza, where (after three years of not being able to work out why the maps were shaped that way) I finally discovered that they were in Eckert IV projection (or possibly Robinson projection or Kavryskiy VII projection).Big Mac wrote:I'm considering your comment on the addition of other mapping projections. I don't know enough about the different projections to know what ones might be useful. I do know that there are lots of different projections and that each type would take time for you to include more than the six you have already incorporated. If I can work out any specific projections that would have some sort of advantage to world building, I will let you know. But I suspect that the six projections you have chosen yourself cover everything I would ever need to do with my small amount of talent. I think that, by the time I've got good enough to get the full potential from OWM 1.0, you will already have had the time to add more, if necessary.
I'll add Eckert IV to our wish list We'll see if we can have it in with the first release.Big Mac wrote:
These broken maps (with "Pac Man poles") are the actual reason I've been wanting to learn cartography for several years. I might be able to get a close approximation with Winkel Tripel projection you have already made, but I don't think it would be close enough to make me happy that they are "fixed", because I want to fix the broken poles, but not change the "feel" that the TSR cartographer was trying to create. If you are able to add a Eckert IV Transformation, at some point, I can import the maps in Eckert IV projection fix the maps, in Transverse Mercator and send them back to Eckert IV projection, to make sure I've not messed up the rest of the world.
Big Mac wrote:
I can also then change my fixed maps from Eckert IV to something that looks less "weird". (My friend Silverblade, who makes 3D space art says I need to make 1:2 ratio rectangles to wrap around spheres, and I would prefer to do most of my world maps in that format.)
Thanks Alejandro! I didn’t expect you to prioritize any of this. As I said - the basics are already covered.Kanchou wrote:Stefan,
We'll try to add at least some of them for the first V1.x release . We setup the code to be pretty modular, so Mollweide and Eckert VI shouldn't be too bad. Interrupted sinusoidal would be a bit harder to add, but we'll have it as part of one of the V1.X releases.
That's one of the perks of being in the alpha/betastefanstr wrote: Thanks Alejandro! I didn’t expect you to prioritize any of this. As I said - the basics are already covered.
That one I had to look up. I'll give it a try if the math isn't too crazy. Else, it will come in one of the post release patches/small feature additions.stefanstr wrote: Any chance of adding Peirce quincuncial at some point? It’s a pretty rare one but it would be immensely useful (at least to me).
That would be really awesome.Kanchou wrote:I'll add Eckert IV to our wish list We'll see if we can have it in with the first release.Big Mac wrote:These broken maps (with "Pac Man poles") are the actual reason I've been wanting to learn cartography for several years. I might be able to get a close approximation with Winkel Tripel projection you have already made, but I don't think it would be close enough to make me happy that they are "fixed", because I want to fix the broken poles, but not change the "feel" that the TSR cartographer was trying to create. If you are able to add a Eckert IV Transformation, at some point, I can import the maps in Eckert IV projection fix the maps, in Transverse Mercator and send them back to Eckert IV projection, to make sure I've not messed up the rest of the world.
Thanks. That sounds fairly logical.Kanchou wrote:That's what the equirectangular projection is. The equirectangular projection has no use in real cartography because of the types of distortion it creates. (i.e. no useful for navigation). However, because it is perfect for texture mapping (mapping to a sphere) it's used a lot in computer graphics. It's also very simple because the grids are equidistant.Big Mac wrote:I can also then change my fixed maps from Eckert IV to something that looks less "weird". (My friend Silverblade, who makes 3D space art says I need to make 1:2 ratio rectangles to wrap around spheres, and I would prefer to do most of my world maps in that format.)
Ideally, you would create a map in a projection that has less distortion to keep you doing things right (i.e. Winkel Tripel), then use a polar projection to fix the poles (i.e. Transverse Mercator) and then transform the finished map to an equirectangular projection and export it for easy texture mapping.
Also, you can use create an equirectangular map to begin with and use the other projections as guidelines to fix the maps.
If you are willing to join in the conversation (and talk to cartography fans who might not necessarily have backed OWM) please feel free to butt in any time you want.Kanchou wrote:I saw you talked about that in the Piazza groups, but I didn't want to just interject into the middle of the conversation . Hope this makes more sense!