# Mapmaking Discussion & Philosophy (WIP/Critique) > Software Discussion >  Upgraded Mac, Software Issues - GIMP, KRITA & CC3+

## damonjynx

Hi,

I finally retired my 13 year old Mac and bought a new flashy one to use Roll20, Discord and whatever. Unfortunately, I had Adobe CS4 on the old computer and really liked it but that is 32-bit and the new OS is 64-bit and therefore it doesn't work. I certainly can't afford and have no intention of buying an Adobe subscription.

I downloaded GIMP and the performance is terrible, I have no idea why. There is just an insane amount of lag between my input and the actions on the screen and it is really a poor imitation of Ps. I can forgive somethings as it's free but it drives me insane. Is there a solution?

I've also downloaded Krita which has 0 performance issues in comparison to GIMP. Yet to play with that properly but it looks Ok so far.

Humble Bundle have a great deal on CC3+ $51AUD for CC3+ lifetime license, City Designer, Dungeon Designer and a heap of other content. From what I''ve seen of some sample maps, they look similar, more polished without question, to those created in Dundjinni. But alas, that s Windows only, which means I have to create a Boot Camp partition and load Windows to run it.

I'm at a loss. I want to start creating content, mainly scenarios/modules/adventures, call them what you will, specifically for Roll20 but have no idea of which would be best? Any suggestions?

----------


## Falconius

Kirta is a very good program.  I've been using Paint Studio Paint Ex which you can usually find on sale, and which is not a subscription, it's very pleasant to use and has lots of resources available.  They offer a three month trail and a cheaper version as well.  That said, I think you should just use Krita a bit more and get deeper into it, to see whether or not you like it.  For map specific programs I think you may just have to break down and use a windows partition, that Humble Bumble deal sounds like it might be worth while.

----------


## Tiana

I would not get the CC3 bundle, having purchased it myself. It is much too convoluted for the limited quality of maps you can make and with the double whammy of being on Mac, not even worth it to you at all when there are similar cost mapping specific programs that you CAN use. If you want to do stamp maps, get Other World Mapper for Mac and don't fuss with the partition. The Mac version is almost identical to the Windows version and a very usable mapping program, while it does not have all the raster editing I want to do with a map for what you describe wanting to do you'll probably find it perfect. Krita fans tend to be very enthusiastic without having a proper realization of its limits, including when I used it, one excruciating limitation which made it unusable for me for anything other than its spectacular paint simulation brushes which I use to make some textures: no "alt/clover becomes the color picker, picks a color, and then goes away" function. It's free. It's limited. You would have to use other programs to get a good map result. Without that eyedropper in and out, digital painting becomes a slog. Maybe they've added it since I used it but that's why I only used it a couple of days and then was like "yeah... I got what I paid for... this is great for a 14 year old but not for a pro"... so now, I use Clip Studio Paint which is good for both Mac and Windows and last I looked, 50% off right now. It is also imperfect. You can only really do comic book text bubbles with it and no other text work.

No program does it all for me... the closest to "does it all" is Adobe, which of course is a subscription package and a hefty learning curve. CC3 has a learning curve and does not do it all. It does 1 specific limited style per pack of assets you get. If you love CC3 maps, then get it and learn it. I don't love CC3 maps. I have found only one tool that impresses me in that package, which is the city block dropper tool, which lets you click a beginning and end point and automatically populates it with any houses in your stream of houses. Um YES PLEASE but can I have that in OWM, where I have confidence the creators are actually listening to my pleas for more and better tools, and not in this nightmare program seemingly from 20 years ago.

Oh yeah if you like free, Photopea is in browser, so it's good for all systems, and it's a Photoshop clone with of course much less functionality, but perfectly good for those basic needs like "I made a drawing of a map in Krita but now I want to put text on it with a stroke around that text and a glow around that text".  :Smile:  I've recommended it many times, for what it does it's an excellent tool for beginning artists in many fields. Plus if you get used to it, you'll transition well to Photoshop, the industry standard beloved by many map artists (but not me, because I don't like subscription fees. I just acknowledge it is quite a good map making program for many!)

----------


## garyg

CC3+ will also run on wine, which I believe works on Macs. There's no need for a separate partition or Windows license. And the ProFantasy support is great!

----------


## waldronate

Believe me, the CC3+ developers are listening. Change is slow when you're trying not to break many years of backwards compatibility.

----------


## Mark Oliva

Tiana's is a pretty good analysis that cuts through advertising and fan-user fog to put things into a good perspective.  For what it's worth, I have CC3+ with most of the add-ons, FM8 and FM9 Beta, OWM and the GIMP.  The one place where I would take exception to your conclusions is with OWM ... a program that I rate highly ... but one that is vector-oriented and somewhat weak with raster cartography, which appears to be what the majority of users here prefer.

Servus,

----------


## Tiana

I agree OWM is weak with raster cartography, and I have been in contact with them several times to request more raster features. I want to hand draw mountains, so I end up just exporting my landmass, drawing over top of it, and then exporting my lineart as a png into the features folder, then repositioning the pieces in OWM which is definitely convoluted. (Or if the land/water is approved I just save it in Clip). I want to do the quintessential texture sandwich, which has to be done in Clip. Some of my requests have made it into the program which is why I hold them in high esteem and recommend the program. I expect that given a decade of work everything they feel is possible that I've asked for will eventually be there, as long as it suits their vision. Of course, I also expect that it'll take ages. Their team is only one or two people as far as I've noticed. I expect the same is true of ProFantasy and similarly have no expectations of speedy changes, but slow evolution over the course of years as they implement what they have the ability to within their framework.  :Smile:  But yes, while I recommend it as a basic mapper program, there are many things I like to do that are simply impossible in that program, and likely any mapping specific time saving program. I will be honest: to get a result I'm happy with, I have to use 2+ programs and it's definitely convoluted. However, if one of my clients asks me to change the shape of the landmass 6 steps into the design on a raster program, I have to rip apart the whole thing. I have saved hours since I included OWM in my workflow, and it's always come up when someone says "sorry but can you make the north just a bit taller and remove that island off the western coast and add a little bit of a cove there instead?"

CC3 is vector mapping only, as far as I can tell. Now I'm sure they are indeed listening, and yes, change is slow in all programs because programming is hard, and old fans want things that new artists turn up their noses at because they're used to Illustrator CC and nothing else will do... I'm not judging them for any speed of implementation. They were cutting edge once and if you don't have an Adobe sized budget things don't change at an Adobe rate, and even their programs are slow to evolve for the better and full of complicated clunk making several of them notoriously hard to learn. And they're an improvement from what came before for desktop publishing...

Now, for someone who doesn't draw or do digital art already, I think CC3 is a highly promising choice, the most amount of assets available for it... far more and better assets than OWM comes with by default... but with no way to integrate my large base of raster resources and constant confusion, it just frustrates _me_ very quickly. Except for the city block tool. Damn... that's a brilliant tool... I honestly think that tool alone IS worth the whole humble bundle fee I paid. If you have no preconceptions of workflow, it's probably a good choice. You can, with nothing more than that humble bundle, just make a good looking map. Wonderdraft is also spoken well of but I can't say I've tried it yet. Same with Dungeon Fog. I hear a lot about it these days, and I think it's browser-based? Subscription based with World Anvil. The results are real pretty. I haven't tried it but I am impressed by its output. I mean, World Anvil is powerful all on its own, not enough to sway me to subscribe but I do respect what they've done and it seems like their dungeon mapper has some really unique features, it isn't fair to mention mapping specific programs and not give them a nod. Multi-level dungeons is some mad props DM organizational idea... which of course can be mimicked with layer folders in any raster image editing program. It's preloaded with many things... but you're stuck with those things. I really should give Wonderdraft a whirl. It is often well spoken of for a cheap mapper. But every Wonderdraft map looks like a Wonderdraft map so I suspect it has the same preloaded problem, where what you see is what you get. Great for speed but you better like the resultant style because that's what it looks like every time.

If they wanted to exclusively create raster maps, really any program will do! Gimp, Paint.net, Krita, Paint Tool Sai, Photoshop, Photo Paint, Paint Shop Pro, Painter, Photopea, Affinity... if it has layers, and the ability to do a stroke around a shape, and the ability to put down text and the ability to customize your brushes, you're good to go. For me, layer blend modes are critical. And being able to outline your selection in some way automatically, a huge timesaver. Since most raster programs do that, people can make maps in any of them, with some strange leaps in logic every now and again compared to just drawing on paper with pencil and pen.

If they just wanted to slap down some maps for their campaign and are okay with a learning curve that's about as steep as Illustrator... not as bad as Blender... I mean, why not, CC3 is on sale for less than $50, that's peanuts for a one time program purchase, and it does have a high variety of built in stamps. I'm not mad they get some of my money, it's for a good cause and they've done a lot for the development of mapping programs over the years, we likely wouldn't see programs like OWM without the inspiration of CC3.

The program does seem to be quite featured in many places. In places it does have that slick workflow I want. Populating your world with features is so fast. It removes any of the struggle someone might have had with a village map. But then it also takes 4 clicks to get to a custom color of my choosing...

I'm probably going to give Campaign Cartographer another chance. I want to like it. I know that buried under its quirks is a reasonably powerful map program. I want to be able to use what it does well, but then, that's yet another program added into my stack... I can really see using it for quicker city assembly in the future though.

Honestly, don't let me sway you, if you want to try it... I'm not angry that the program exists, they've done a lot for the digital mapping community over the years and it wouldn't be what it is today without ProFantasy. I might feel completely differently if it were my first mapping program experience and I wasn't accustomed to how one program does it, and if I weren't primed with now almost two decades of expectations of how a digital art program experience should feel when drawing. I grew up on Paint Shop Pro. You could probably make a map with it, if you wanted. I got so used to the convoluted logic used in making maps in a raster program... I like this newfangled addition of mapping specific programs... I feel like they're great for the unskilled to just dive right in, without needing to know how to draw or master a vector program with its own convoluted logic. But, I feel like the best is still yet to come. World Creator is the first program that's truly excited me for world creation (what an apt name) but I can't in good faith recommend it to the average mapper because of how expensive it is compared to all of the other programs. I feel like its intuitive erosion is an excellent step in the direction I'd like to see more of. It simply doesn't behave as needed to make a 2D map, though, but ah, to have some of those 3d dynamic modelling procedural tools in a way that also captured the aestetic of the fantasy map and managed its assets in a reasonably organized fashion... now there's a program for someone who isn't me to make in the future. Procedural erosion, man, that's what I really love.

Since I'm rambling, I forgot, there's a fun new freebie I ran into. DungeonScrawl. It does one style of dungeon only but what a cool toy. Exports SVGs, copyright is CC0 for your results. Give that a whirl to make a basic black and white traditional hatched dungeon shape. Maybe eventually they'll add furniture and it'll actually be useful but it's a fun toy now, to make a base to customize. Have fun with that!

----------


## Redrobes

Dont know if this is the same thing but when you asked for a tool that fills in a line with a selection of houses then it brought to mind paint shop pro's image pipes. I just did a check for Gimp and it has similar too:

https://www.gimp.org/tutorials/Image_Pipes/

I recall I made a similar feature for my mapping app but mine would only take the one current icon you were holding and randomly size and rotate copies and you moved it. Mine was done more for trees, bushes etc rather than houses. But with a pipe you had a selection of icons lined up and it would drop them in. So maybe that would be useful to try out.

----------


## damonjynx

Thanks for the advice & tips folks. I’m strongly leaning towards cc3+ for these reasons:
1. It comes with Overland, City & Dungeon mapping capabilities.
2. I am no digital artist. I struggle with many aspects, apart from the actual drawing, colouring and shading are my bane.
3. I wasn’t overly impressed with the maps done in some of the YouTube tuts but after googling cc3 maps-images, I did find quite a few I liked.
4. My commission work is primarily old-school style dungeon maps and I feel I won’t be disadvantaged using this program.
5. I also want to produce quality maps quickly and while it does have a learning curve, so does every graphics program I’ve looked at. 

I’ll probably try the Wave ootion.

----------


## heruca

> Humble Bundle have a great deal on CC3+ $51AUD for CC3+ lifetime license, City Designer, Dungeon Designer and a heap of other content. From what I''ve seen of some sample maps, they look similar, more polished without question, to those created in Dundjinni.


I think Dundjiini-made maps tend to look better than CC3 maps, even after all these years. There are occasional exceptions, but comparing output from a _typical_ user of each app, I think DJ maps tend to look better.

----------


## damonjynx

Well, I am comparing them to the maps I made in Dundjinni years ago

----------


## Mark Oliva

> CC3 is vector mapping only, as far as I can tell.


Quite a reply!  Let's start with the sentence above, because it's incorrect.  CC2 and CC2 Pro were vector mapping only programs, CC2 Pro with an exception for raster backgrounds.  CC3 and CC3+ can make vector and raster maps and they also do a rather respectable job with mixing vector and raster, if that's what one wants.

Part of your message is a bit problematical, because it goes back and forth between saying _CC3_ and _CC3+_, when it appears that you're using the two names to describe one and the same thing.  That confuses because _CC3_  still has a lot of users, although it no longer is a current product.  _CC3+_ is the successor to _CC3_ and the current product.  Mixing the names leads to confusion for the following reason.  When one says that _CC3_ can do this or that, but one _really_ means _CC3+_, a _CC3_ user may say, _I didn't know I can do that!  How?"_  And afterward, he or she may indeed try to find out how, only to learn that it's one of the many new things that _CC3+_ can do and _CC3_ can't.  Moral of this story:  If one wants to communicate well, it's best to call things by their real names.

Before I continue, someone may wonder if I know what I'm talking about.  Everyone will have to decide that for themselves, but I do have and know how to use all of the following:

_Campaign Cartographer 3+_ with most of the add-ons_, Fractal Mapper 8, Fractal Mapper 9 Beta, Other World Mapper, Dundjinni, Map Forge, The GIMP, Paint.net_ and probably some other things I haven't used for a while that don't come to mind immediately.  Our _Vintyri™ Project_ has made and offers 3rd party add-ons for _CC3+, FM8, Other World Mapper_ and _Dundjinni_.

Tiana's post deals very much with the type of cartography that involves making one's own mapping objects.  Cartographers who work on that basis make up a substantial part of the guild's membership.  Another substantial part of the membership is the group of cartographers who _do not_ want to do their own artwork but rather are seeking a program that allows one to fill a map _easily_ with pre-made objects from the program's maker and/or 3rd party vendors.  Products like _CC3+, Fractal Mapper 8, Other World Mapper, MapForge_ and _Dundjinni_ do that.  Products like the _GIMP, Paint.net, Krita, Paint Tool Sai, Photoshop, Photo Paint, Paint Shop Pro, Painter, Photopea, Affinity_ etc. do not.  That seems to be the case here:




> 2. I am no digital artist. I struggle with many aspects, apart from the actual drawing, colouring and shading are my bane.


Hernan has added another interesting aside to this discussion:




> I think Dundjinni-made maps tend to look better than CC3 maps, even after all these years. There are occasional exceptions, but comparing output from a _typical_ user of each app, I think DJ maps tend to look better.


I agree with this.  Most _CC3/CC3+_ maps ... with a few very impressive exceptions ... tend to look like _CC3/CC3+_ maps, which can be pretty but usually are rather unimaginative.  The maps that _Dundjinni_ users put out were ... for me ... far more impressive than most of the _CC3/CC3+_ output that I've seen over the years.  And that opinion is, of course, by it's nature absolutely subjective.  But to continue with it, I would add that the same quality assessment applies to the unofficial successor to _Dundjinni, Map Forge_, which can do much more than _Dundjinni_.  Here one also should add that Hernan (user name _Heruca_, is the author of _MapForge_.

I seldom recommend for or against a specific program or group of programs because the needs and desires of individual cartographers vary greatly, and there is no program or even group of programs that I think will answer everyone's needs.  I also think in discussing such things, one need look separately at cartographic programs and at graphical programs.

I would put the following into the category of cartographic programs, which I'll examine in more detail:  

_Campaign Cartographer 3, Fractal Mapper 8, Other World Mapper, Dundjinni_ and _Map Forge_.

I would put the following into the category of graphical programs.  I don't intend to look at them in more detail because they're somewhat aside from the goal of the original poster's query:

_The GIMP, Paint.net, Krita, Paint Tool Sai, Photoshop, Photo Paint, Paint Shop Pro, Painter, Photopea, Affinity_ and many more similar applications.

It also is important for _Windows_ users to give some thought to the question of 64- vs. 32-bit applications.  Most _Windows_ users today have 64-bit versions of _Windows_ with two- and four-core processors, high ability graphic cards and between 8 and 64 GB of memory.  Most of the cartographic programs I listed above are pitifully obsolete 32-bit versions that allow you to use only one processor core and only 4 GB of your memory.  At least one of them even ignores your expensive graphic card.  This obsolescence makes a growing number of problems these days for cartographers making large and complex maps who find their work crashing and/or their ability to export large scale maps inhibited by the software's inability to use the their computers' resources.  Anyone looking to buy a cartographic program for more than relatively simple maps would do well to ponder how this obsolescence might affect their work.


*Let's start with Other World Mapper from Three Minds Software:*




> I agree OWM is weak with raster cartography


That's true, but it's not what I consider to be the main weak point in _OWM_.  For starters, _OWM_ is the only one of the cartographic programs I listed above that _is not_ an obsolete 32-bit application.  _OWM_ for _Windows_ is a snappy, fast-running and relatively bug-free program that really sings most of the time and has unlimited potential.  It also is available in _Mac_ and _LINUX_ versions.  That notwithstanding, _OWM_ has what we consider a very serious design problem in the current version 1.02 that makes it useless for mapping the _Jörðgarð™_ campaign setting of our _Vintyri Project_.  _OWM_ uses a large layering system for the various objects in a map.  The program assigns various abilities and effects to some but not all layers.  It also uses a default system to decide upon which layer an object will be placed.  As a result, certain abilities and effects cannot be placed upon certain objects because _OWM_ places the objects on the _"wrong"_ layer, bringing the cartographer to a dead end.  Until _Three Minds Software_ finds its way to  giving the cartographer the ability to reassign objects to a layer of his or her choice, that dead end will remain, and the program will be useless to us despite all of its great qualities.  Unfortunately.


*Fractal Mapper 8/Fractal Mapper 9 from NBOS Software*:

_Fractal Mapper_ is available only in a _Windows_ version.  Like almost everything else, _FM8_ has the problems of all 32-bit software.  _FM9_, in comparison, is a 64-bit program that currently is in beta status.  No release date for the full version has been announced yet.  We have been running tests with the beta version of _FM9_, and it already is a clean program that runs smoothly and takes full advantage of our 64-bit computers.  The 64-bit beta produces maps that _FM8_ is unable to read.  As a result, we can use _FM9_ at present only for testing and not for production.   However, _FM9_ can process _FM8_ maps without trouble, so an upgrade should be no problem.  Both _FM8_ and _FM9_ are solid, workaday cartographic programs without the bells, whistles and steam pops that are offered with _CC3+_  or _OWM_.  Like _CC3+_  and _OWM_, _FM8_ and _FM9_ can do both vector and raster mapping as well as a mix of the two.  In terms of making maps, _FM8_ can do most but not all things that _CC3+_ without add-ons can do and some things that  _CC3+_ cannot do.  What _FM8_ can do, it can do much faster than _CC3+_.  I have no other application on my main working PC that runs as stably as _FM8_.  We have been using _FM8_ as our main mapping program at the _Vintyri Project_ since 1996.  The last time that _FM8_ crashed on me was several years ago with Version 8.10d.  I've never had a crash with Version 8.10e or the current version 8.10f.  However, for many users, _FM8_ and perhaps _FM9_ will have a serious shortcoming for some users.  The sets of fill patterns and symbols - both raster and vector - that are delivered with _FM8_ are woefully small, and the vector graphics are antiques from a long vanished computer era.  That's balanced somewhat by the fact that there are more than 10,000 high quality raster symbols and fills available in freeware packages, and if one is careful to comply with ProFantasy's restrictions on object embedding, one also can use all of the many _CC3+_ symbol sets in _FM8_ and _FM9_.


*Dundjinni from Dundjinni Enterprises*

_Dundjinni_ long was the great legend among RPG cartographic programs, available for _Windows_ and _Macs_.  It no longer is a current program.  It still does have a large body of users.  But its obsolescence goes far beyond its being a 32-bit application.  It is very difficult to get it to run under _Windows 10_.  In its day, it was THE program for mapping dungeons and battlemaps.  _Dundjinni_ users, as Hernan remarked above, regularly produce dungeon and battlemaps far superior to most of those made by _CC3+_ users, and that applies just as well to users of _OWM_ and _FM8_.  The last update of _Dundjinni_ was released 14 years ago.  The program is an antique.  _MapForge_ generally is seen as the up-to-date successor to _Dundjinni_.


*Map Forge from Battleground Games*

When it comes to making dungeon and battlemaps, no other cartographic program comes within a country mile of _MapForge_.  It does everything _Dundjinni_ did and much more.  One hardly could imagine a dungeon designer's tool that isn't included in _MapForge_.  The graphics delivered with _CC3+, FM8_ and _OWM_ look like refugees from 1930s Disney cartoons in comparison to those delivered with _MapForge_.  However, there are downsides for some cartographers.  There is no 64-bit version.  The wonders of _MapForge_ dwindle quickly when one tries to make larger villages, cities or overland maps.  The _MapForge_ domain, like that of _Dundjinni_ before it, reaches its borders when it tries to go beyond dungeon and battlemap cartography.  And _MapForge_ needs to be outfitted with art packs.  Map-making is limited if one uses only the art packs delivered with _MapForge_.  Art packs come at a price, making _MapForge_ a potentially expensive program in the long-run.  One can import one's third-party PNG graphics collections into _MapForge_, but one loses with them the advantages that art packs offer.

*Campaign Cartographer 3+ from ProFantasy Software*

In a sense, I've saved the best and the worst for the last.  Let us see if that's the case, before _CC3+_ users start the weeping, moaning and gnashing of teeth.  Let's begin with the _best_ part.  _CC3+_ alone is an excellent program for making overland maps.  With add-ons it becomes an excellent program for dungeon, village and city maps as well as for battlemaps.  It has an incredible amount of tools available for every purpose that do glorious and wondrous things.  In these respects, only _MapForge_ can outshine it, and then only on dungeon and battlemap level.  No one has better support services than ProFantasy.  In most respects, _CC3+_ is an excellent program.  But what about the _worst_?  _CC3+_ has all of the disadvantages of 32-Bit software, and it ignores the graphic card.  For some time, ProFantasy has mentioned vaguely a future 64-bit _CC4_, but to date it's been only vaporware.  _CC3+_ has been around for several years, but a relatively clean-running version, like those of _MapForge, FM8_ and _OWM_, continues to elude ProFantasy, although the program already is on it 25th patch.  To be fair, some of those patches were released to improve or expand the program rather than fix it.  A lot of users have a lot of problems with _CC3+_ and its add-ons.  I'm not going to make my own arguments or contentions here to support that appraisal.  Instead, I'll recommend that anyone who doubts these conclusions go to the ProFantasy Community Forum at http://forum.profantasy.com/ to read the last year's worth of postings.  There users will tell the story for themselves.  You'll find nothing to compare with this plethora of problem postings on the ProFantasy forum at the _OWM, NBOS_ or _MapForge_ forums.  But that brings us back to the _"best"_ again.  You'll find little anywhere that compares with ProFantasy's excellent support services for customers who have such problems.

So ... at the start of all of this, _damonjynx_ wanted suggestions.  They're difficult to make.  But the above might  help a bit.

Happy weekend.  Servus,

----------


## Azélor

Back at the root of the problem. I don't understand why a 32 bit software can't work on a 64 bit system.  The problem should be the opposite. 
Maybe Macs are different but on PC, we got many 32 bit programs still running. Although most of these are small and would not benefit being coded in 64 bit.
Even if 32 bit Photoshop is not optimal, it should work.

----------


## heruca

The problem is that Mac OS v10.15 (aka Catalina) doesn't run 32-bit apps, like all other prior OS versions did. And Mac users are quick to update their OS, probably because most people leave their system set to do so automatically. Mac users not yet on Catalina can use MapForge (and other 32-bit apps) no problem.

In the case of MapForge, I am currently working on putting a 64-bit WINE "wrapper" around the 32-bit app to allow it to run on Catalina. Initial tests are promising.

----------


## heruca

> _MapForge_ does everything _Dundjinni_ did and much more.


This will hopefully be true soon, once MapForge has drawing tools (in v1.2). Not long, now! That should add a lot of flexibility that's currently missing.

----------


## Mark Oliva

> Back at the root of the problem. I don't understand why a 32 bit software can't work on a 64 bit system.  The problem should be the opposite.


I think you're misunderstanding something.  32-Bit software does, of course, run just fine under 64-bit _Windows_.  It's just that 32-bit software cannot address and use many of the resources of a 64-bit system.




> on PC, we got many 32 bit programs still running. Although most of these are small and would not benefit being coded in 64 bit.


Correct.  There's no need to write smaller 32-bit programs into 64-bit code.  They don't need and usually wouldn't use the full resources of a 32-bit system.  But large graphical programs like the cartographic applications that I named would perform much better if they had access to memory over 4 GB and the other resources that a 64-bit system has to offer,

Servus,

----------


## waldronate

> In the case of MapForge, I am currently working on putting a 64-bit WINE "wrapper" around the 32-bit app to allow it to run on Catalina. Initial tests are promising.


Just in time for the new Apple Silicon Macs!

----------


## damonjynx

Wow...

Some really great information and insight, thank you everyone, particularly Mark and Tiana.

I'm still leaning towards the CC3+ bundle in spite of its shortfalls. As Mark mentioned in his post, even without using the program, the ability to use the symbol sets in other programs is probably worth the cost of admission alone. Coupled with the extras included in the bundle, namely the Token, Castles and Temples & Tombs packs it really is good value and a heap of symbols...

I would call my maps 'procedural' rather than 'artistic', meaning that by and large they were created using Ps techniques; filters, path tricks, layer masks and effects and so on, more than artistic skill. Speaking of which, I'm quite sure that many of the fine cartographers who grace these pages and those in many, many RPG books and games have developed shortcuts, their own personal brushes and or objects, that they use in their maps. I can't imagine them re-drawing differing, individual tree types for every map as an example...

One of the things I was looking forward to using in GIMP, and Krita now that GIMP is dead to me, is animated brushes, but alas, that requires some artistic skill, which to be brutally honest, I lack. I could import CC3+'s symbols into either of these programs and try them out I suppose...that might be an interesting experiment for a later date...

Anyhow, I'm going to bite the bullet and spend some time getting to know CC3+ with a Winebottle! I think for my purposes; creating the mix of maps I need for my plans using Roll20 and maintaining my old-school maps for my publisher, the CC3+ bundle will do the jobs nicely, and if it doesn't, well it's only a little over $50, I'll go without a couple of take-out dinners! 

As an aside, I Googled 'Campaign Cartographer Maps' and was pleasantly surprised by many, certainly not all, of the maps created. Looking at an old annual, I believe it was the 2015 one, there are OSR styles, a cross hatching dungeon one , very much like Dyson's and a host of others, and a LoTR, Greyhawk kind of overland one, which I will no doubt use heavily...

----------


## heruca

What's an animated brush? Is it a stamp tool that changes to another stamp/symbol after every click?

----------


## Falconius

> What's an animated brush? Is it a stamp tool that changes to another stamp/symbol after every click?


Pretty much.

----------


## waldronate

If you're looking to use CC3+ with Wine and have problems getting it all set up, please ask at the ProFantasy forums and/or directly to ProFantasy tech support. There are quite a few folks using CC3+ under Wine and willing to offer assistance.

I recommend new CC3+ users watch a tutorial video or two before getting too deeply into things. I'm a fan of the SYMFILL command myself because I'm way to lazy to click that much.

----------


## damonjynx

> Pretty much.


As an example lets say you wanted to create a Mountain animated brush, caveat here, I've not actually done this so it may not be 100% accurate but you'll get the idea, you create a new document at your preferred resolution, lets say it's for print so we'll create it at 300ppi and make it 300x300px. You draw your 1st mountain shape on Layer 1 , then your second on layer 2 and so forth. Obviously you keep each differing shape in the same general style. Apparently it works well with 6-8, and possibly more, layers. If you have a white background layer delete it so all your layers are transparent, then in GIMP, you save it in GIMPs brushes folder with the extension for animated brushes, which IIRC is either .gbh or .gbr Then when you want draw a sequence of mountains, you just set the spacing to something you're happy with and draw your mountains in, working from top to bottom. GIMP randomly selects a a layer from the stack for each instance. I'm sure there is a tutorial here about them. If not, there are definitely some on YouTube.

----------


## damonjynx

> If you're looking to use CC3+ with Wine and have problems getting it all set up, please ask at the ProFantasy forums and/or directly to ProFantasy tech support. There are quite a few folks using CC3+ under Wine and willing to offer assistance.
> 
> I recommend new CC3+ users watch a tutorial video or two before getting too deeply into things. I'm a fan of the SYMFILL command myself because I'm way to lazy to click that much.


Awesome, thanks Waldronate. I will do. How do I join the CC3+ group here?

----------


## waldronate

> Awesome, thanks Waldronate. I will do. How do I join the CC3+ group here?


That's an excellent question. Fortunately, it says you're already a member so I don't need to worry about it. Dodged the responsibility bullet again!

----------


## Tiana

> Moral of this story:  If one wants to communicate well, it's best to call things by their real names.


Yes, Mark, I am inept. -_- I do enough of a job reminding myself of that without your help, so because of this specific comment, I am done with this thread and providing my thoughts on workflow on Mac. If someone else wants to hear from me on the topic you can PM me.

----------


## damonjynx

> If you're looking to use CC3+ with Wine and have problems getting it all set up, please ask at the ProFantasy forums and/or directly to ProFantasy tech support. There are quite a few folks using CC3+ under Wine and willing to offer assistance.
> 
> I recommend new CC3+ users watch a tutorial video or two before getting too deeply into things. I'm a fan of the SYMFILL command myself because I'm way to lazy to click that much.


Waldronate you tease, what does that command do? Is it like the street tool thing in cities? I've just started my first map, a re-do of a commission piece using the Jonathon Roberts (aka Torstan here for those that don't know of him) Overland style, and am now insanely curious. I'm not sure if it's the best style for this particular map but we'll see how it goes.

----------


## waldronate

SYMFILL isn't as exciting as it sounds. It fills something with symbols (It's called "Symbols in Area" in the menus to distinguish it from the FOREST command, which is "Fill with Symbols"). SYMFILL can make orchards or random messes, scale things by distances from the edge, align things to the edge tangent or perpendicular, and do lots of stuff that involves a placing things onto a jittered grid with a distance field value/gradient computed from a set of entities. Some examples of its use appear in http://forum.profantasy.com/comments...cussionID=7861 and  https://rpgmaps.profantasy.com/autom...drawing-tools/ and https://rpgmaps.profantasy.com/drawi...attered-woods/ at the ProFantasy blog. Your mentioning an animated brush (random groups on the symbol placement tools in CC3+) brought it to mind because it's basically an automated animated brush for those of me who are too lazy to click a lot.

SYMFILL is the 2D analog of the ESC (escarpment), which puts things along the edges of entities. They have similar dynamics, but each is a little better adapted for its intended purpose. The FOREST command in CC3+ is a bit different than SYMFILL in that it uses blocks of symbols of various size in order to tile an area on the map. SYMFILL has better dynamics, but FOREST can tile an area in fewer symbols with the right set. Tiling with as few symbols as possible was very important in CC2, but CC3+ is a bit more efficient.

----------


## damonjynx

Thanks Waldronate, I'll have to check that out. I could use that tool on this map - there are areas of forest where the style fill pattern just doesn't suit and I spent a good 10-15 minutes placing individual (though -random) trees.

----------


## waldronate

My laziness knows few bounds (and those are usually along the line with the area marked "hard work").

----------


## dwaink

This discussion is fascinating, with solid points all around. Tiana i am most sad that u have not found CC3+ good enough to be helpful to u  :Frown: . I suspect if u keep tinkering with it u will find it more useful but perhaps i am wrong. Mr. Oliva i have tried 3 times to install the amazing art in your massive packages into CC3+ and failed every time. I truly wish they made it easier to install third party stuff...that is my biggest complaint about the program. It is very unintuitive. I like it anyway  :Smile:

----------


## damonjynx

> Mr. Oliva i have tried 3 times to install the amazing art in your massive packages into CC3+ and failed every time. I truly wish they made it easier to install third party stuff...that is my biggest complaint about the program. It is very unintuitive. I like it anyway


Hi dwaink, have you tried asking on the forums over at Profantasy? I had some minor installation issues (totally on my end) and the responses were rapid and very helpful.

----------

