Community USForum Map - Rev #334

[Bla]

no the big deal is not that it's distorted, the big deal is that the shape is not the same.

The problem isn't distortion, but the problem is distortion...?
Distortion is an alteration of shapes.

if you put a huge, equilateral triangle where greenland is irl, and then you look at the triangle in a mercator, or equidistant projection, the equilateral triangle is not a equilateral triangle.

It's not an equilateral triangle but it's still a triangle. The shape is roughly the same, but it's distorted.
No matter what you do there's no way you can perfectly turn a sphere into a map. Something will ALWAYS get distorted when you turn a sphere into a plane.

And why is this suddenly a problem now, it never seemed to be a problem before when we were making the old NS map. We already voted to use equirectangular projection, I'd guess people have had the chance to find information about what they were actually voting for but if you think that's not the case let's just set up another one.

So if my nation has a shape 'f' irl, and then i put it on the equidistant map by just copying and pasting, it will be wrong, because it is not supposed to look like shape 'f', it is supposed to look distorted. If i put the nation as shape 'f' onto the map, it will look completely different irl, and if i draw a equilateral triangle on the equidistant map close to the poles, irl, it will not look like a equilateral triangle. I don't have a problem with the distortion, i have a problem with the non-ability to have the correct distortion.

What is the correct distortion?

[Hellpotatoe]

The only thing than I know is:
If's map's shape's change's, I goe's, because's I don't's know's how's to's draw's in's the's other's random's format's
If the map "type" change, someone will have to draw on it to me, because idk how to make it.

[vh]

no the big deal is not that it's distorted, the big deal is that the shape is not the same.

The problem isn't distortion, but the problem is distortion...?
Distortion is an alteration of shapes.

kolok

if you put a huge, equilateral triangle where greenland is irl, and then you look at the triangle in a mercator, or equidistant projection, the equilateral triangle is not a equilateral triangle.

It's not an equilateral triangle but it's still a triangle. The shape is roughly the same, but it's distorted.
No matter what you do there's no way you can perfectly turn a sphere into a map. Something will ALWAYS get distorted when you turn a sphere into a plane.

yes but a more accurate map with less distortion is better?

And why is this suddenly a problem now, it never seemed to be a problem before when we were making the old NS map. We already voted to use equirectangular projection, I'd guess people have had the chance to find information about what they were actually voting for but if you think that's not the case let's just set up another one.

because this map is official, and it's a real planet. thats round. (did we decide that, because i would love to have a flat world). also because i've drawn a kallisto map, just like other people have drawn their national maps, and if the national map doesn't match with the world map that is bad.

So if my nation has a shape 'f' irl, and then i put it on the equidistant map by just copying and pasting, it will be wrong, because it is not supposed to look like shape 'f', it is supposed to look distorted. If i put the nation as shape 'f' onto the map, it will look completely different irl, and if i draw a equilateral triangle on the equidistant map close to the poles, irl, it will not look like a equilateral triangle. I don't have a problem with the distortion, i have a problem with the non-ability to have the correct distortion.

What is the correct distortion?

well the horizontal lines on the map are scaled perfectly, but the vertical lines are not. the vertical lines are parralel and spaced an equal distance apart from each other. In reality, the vertical lines should all meet at the top. This means that if your nation is close to the poles, it will be stretched horizontally a certain amount.

i'm fine with the equirectangular map though, if i can have kallisto near the equator the error should be minimal (<10%).

[Bla]

yes but a more accurate map with less distortion is better?

It would be, but it comes at the cost of other things. Look at the Mollweide projection for example:

Compare that to a sattelite image:

The parts near the edge still get distorted beyond recognizion, and north becomes a curve instead of up on the map, in contrast to the center. Distortion is still a problem, it's just distorted differently.

because this map is official,

The other project was also an attempt to make an official map.

and it's a real planet. thats round. (did we decide that, because i would love to have a flat world). also because i've drawn a kallisto map, just like other people have drawn their national maps, and if the national map doesn't match with the world map that is bad.

The national maps so far could be cut out of the world map and thus have distortion. If you can change projection on the world map then you can also do it on the national map, there shouldn't be any difference there.
But well planets usually are spherical... I'd be against a flat world. We voted for it to be a planet so I assume that means it's spherical.

well the horizontal lines on the map are scaled perfectly, but the vertical lines are not. the vertical lines are parralel and spaced an equal distance apart from each other. In reality, the vertical lines should all meet at the top. This means that if your nation is close to the poles, it will be stretched horizontally a certain amount.

See the first answer. Something will always get distorted. There's no "correct" distortion.

i'm fine with the equirectangular map though, if i can have kallisto near the equator the error should be minimal (<10%).

I don't have a problem with this.

[vh]

yes but a more accurate map with less distortion is better?

It would be, but it comes at the cost of other things. Look at the Mollweide projection for example: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Mollweide_projection_SW.jpg/640px-Mollweide_projection_SW.jpg
Compare that to a sattelite image:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/North_America_satellite_orthographic.jpg/557px-North_America_satellite_orthographic.jpg
The parts near the edge still get distorted beyond recognizion, and north becomes a curve instead of up on the map, in contrast to the center. Distortion is still a problem, it's just distorted differently.

goode's homolosine is better than most, only a bit of unpopulated russia is off: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Goode-homolosine.jpg

because this map is official,

The other project was also an attempt to make an official map.

well fiah titled the thread to be official, and we agreed that we wanted an official map, but i don't think we ever voted that the map was official. It doesn't matter anyways. When we were making the other map, i was under the impression that we were on a fictional flat world.

and it's a real planet. thats round. (did we decide that, because i would love to have a flat world). also because i've drawn a kallisto map, just like other people have drawn their national maps, and if the national map doesn't match with the world map that is bad.

The national maps so far could be cut out of the world map and thus have distortion. If you can change projection on the world map then you can also do it on the national map, there shouldn't be any difference there.

they could, but usually local maps aren't cut out of the world map. it would look strange, for example, alaska in the mollweide map. alaska seems stretched out, but i like to imagine my national map as having minimal distortion due to the small part of the globe it fills.

But well planets usually are spherical... I'd be against a flat world. We voted for it to be a planet so I assume that means it's spherical.

well the horizontal lines on the map are scaled perfectly, but the vertical lines are not. the vertical lines are parralel and spaced an equal distance apart from each other. In reality, the vertical lines should all meet at the top. This means that if your nation is close to the poles, it will be stretched horizontally a certain amount.

See the first answer. Something will always get distorted. There's no "correct" distortion.

(i meant just how the map is distorted, not how it's correctly distorted (yes i know i answered your question about the correct distortion )).

i'm fine with the equirectangular map though, if i can have kallisto near the equator the error should be minimal (<10%).

I don't have a problem with this.

[Bla]

goode's homolosine is better than most, only a bit of unpopulated russia is off: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Goode-homolosine.jpg

But it's based on Earth's oceans, making it useless for our planet. And as I said earlier, it may not be very distorted, but ripping a planet into chunks like that is a pain to look at, especially where land masses are divided into two parts, like Greenland.

they could, but usually local maps aren't cut out of the world map. it would look strange, for example, alaska in the mollweide map. alaska seems stretched out, but i like to imagine my national map as having minimal distortion due to the small part of the globe it fills.

Yes, so you apply anothet projection as I said. There's no difference between using a strange projection on the world map or your normal map. And if you want absolutely minimal distortion on your normal map you would still have to use another projection than any of the ones used for world maps.

[vh]

they could, but usually local maps aren't cut out of the world map. it would look strange, for example, alaska in the mollweide map. alaska seems stretched out, but i like to imagine my national map as having minimal distortion due to the small part of the globe it fills.

Yes, so you apply anothet projection as I said. There's no difference between using a strange projection on the world map or your normal map. And if you want absolutely minimal distortion on your normal map you would still have to use another projection than any of the ones used for world maps.

but if i apply different projections from my normal map and the world map, how do i convert them back and forth?

[Hellpotatoe]

they could, but usually local maps aren't cut out of the world map. it would look strange, for example, alaska in the mollweide map. alaska seems stretched out, but i like to imagine my national map as having minimal distortion due to the small part of the globe it fills.

Yes, so you apply anothet projection as I said. There's no difference between using a strange projection on the world map or your normal map. And if you want absolutely minimal distortion on your normal map you would still have to use another projection than any of the ones used for world maps.

but if i apply different projections from my normal map and the world map, how do i convert them back and forth?

With fiah blagic program.
Google it.

[vh]

cool, will do.

[Darvince]

bump

[atomic7732]

Can someone put Nausikkak on here? (preferrably with new SKA borders)

[atomic7732]

bump

I need Nausikkak so that I can do things this break.

[Hellpotatoe]

bump

I need Nausikkak so that I can do things this break.

Make it yourself

[Darvince]

>fall break
>what
>then i remember
>private school have thank give break
>*hasasad*

[atomic7732]

actually this thing is new

[vh]

bump

[atomic7732]

bumping this every day until someone does it
and every 4 days it's not done I'll bump it 2^x times

[Darvince]

since i can't be half-assed to do what nue wants, have this instead:

[vh]

...

[FiahOwl]

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '83472'.

[vh]

several things:

1. It should be noncolored; the color layer should be seperate.
2. text should be on a seperate layer, or the same layer as the color, idk.
3. enlarge the bla/nue/dar continent
4. shrink hellpotatoe's thing a bit

[atomic7732]

Nausikkak must proportion.

Maybe bla should do it.

[vh]

bla's day:

24-8 sleep
8-16 blacraft mapping
16-24 ns mapping

[atomic7732]

Bla is very good at ordering things and setting standards so he could standardize layers by posting an xcf and a png

[FiahOwl]

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '83497'.

[atomic7732]

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

[Darvince]

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

You didn't read anything in this topic did you?

[vh]

well there are several options i think.

1. gimp layers (not familiar with gimp but if everyone wants i can cope with it)
2. paint.net layers (paint.net is slow, so don't especially like but i can cope with it)
3. seperate pngs (seperate files are a bit cumbersome but otherwise the best solution)

[atomic7732]

therefore gimp

[Darvince]

therefore seperate pngs