The school term starts tomorrow. This may be a factor in the length of time before this update is finalized. Below are responses to your comments, and I still welcome more.
@Paddlin: Yes, yes it does. I had very little experience when I made the first version.
@Thorpe: Curving the lines would ruin the effect that I'm going for. I'm not sure what you mean by the background blends in too much with the land. The texture of the paper is similar to small wrinkles on a paper or paper-like material and would likely be more prominent than they are since I about halved the effect on the land. The background color is vastly different from any of the land, so again I'm not sure what you mean.
@Thorpe and Cireon: I will look into the background some.
@Cireon: Increasing the brightness of the land results in a lowered effect of the texture and a more bland map. I may be able to work a little with changing the texture, but most likely it'll look worse. As Vexer mentioned, it will be an HD map. Due to being spherical in nature a world that is not lopsided is represented exactly as twice as long as it is tall when flattened for a map. If you remove non-inhabitable or barely inhabitable areas such as the polar areas (this is assuming a tilt, rotation, and orbit around the a star similar to Earth that results in polar ice caps) than you have a map that is more than twice as wide as it is tall. However, such a map would not have good visual proportion for a world and thus I limited it to twice as wide and scrunched a little. Not nearly as much as is done on the various other world maps on the site.
@Matty: We are in the 2010's, I just expect everyone to have a 1920 x 1080 monitor. Even my three year old laptop had 1600 x 900 resolution. Well either way, that is what the smaller button is for. What you are saying sounds like the opposite of what the others are saying as far as land compared to background and more inline with what I see on my screen. Makes me wonder about people's monitor settings of brightness, contrast, and gamma. For example, I don't view maps on my TV due to the colorization being set ideally for me to view Netflix. Yes, that is the font I used.
@Marcoxa: Other than your mention not to be rude, I disagree with everything you stated. Though, I only partially disagree with the difference between it and different maps compared to the difference between the old version and different maps.
The school term starts tomorrow. This may be a factor in the length of time before this update is finalized. Below are responses to your comments, and I still welcome more.
@Paddlin: Yes, yes it does. I had very little experience when I made the first version.
@Thorpe: Curving the lines would ruin the effect that I'm going for. I'm not sure what you mean by the background blends in too much with the land. The texture of the paper is similar to small wrinkles on a paper or paper-like material and would likely be more prominent than they are since I about halved the effect on the land. The background color is vastly different from any of the land, so again I'm not sure what you mean.
@Thorpe and Cireon: I will look into the background some.
@Cireon: Increasing the brightness of the land results in a lowered effect of the texture and a more bland map. I may be able to work a little with changing the texture, but most likely it'll look worse. As Vexer mentioned, it will be an HD map. Due to being spherical in nature a world that is not lopsided is represented exactly as twice as long as it is tall when flattened for a map. If you remove non-inhabitable or barely inhabitable areas such as the polar areas (this is assuming a tilt, rotation, and orbit around the a star similar to Earth that results in polar ice caps) than you have a map that is more than twice as wide as it is tall. However, such a map would not have good visual proportion for a world and thus I limited it to twice as wide and scrunched a little. Not nearly as much as is done on the various other world maps on the site.
@Matty: We are in the 2010's, I just expect everyone to have a 1920 x 1080 monitor. Even my three year old laptop had 1600 x 900 resolution. Well either way, that is what the smaller button is for. What you are saying sounds like the opposite of what the others are saying as far as land compared to background and more inline with what I see on my screen. Makes me wonder about people's monitor settings of brightness, contrast, and gamma. For example, I don't view maps on my TV due to the colorization being set ideally for me to view Netflix. Yes, that is the font I used.
@Marcoxa: Other than your mention not to be rude, I disagree with everything you stated. Though, I only partially disagree with the difference between it and different maps compared to the difference between the old version and different maps.
