|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While definitely on a tangent, have you notice how the illustration on page 523 on the CRB is completely wrong regarding perspective? Both the scythe blades would hit the wall and not their intended niches!
Sorry, but I had to share this. You may continue your discussion.
|
While definitely on a tangent, have you notice how the illustration on page 523 on the CRB is completely wrong regarding perspective? Both the scythe blades would hit the wall and not their intended niches!
Sorry, but I had to share this. You may continue your discussion.
I figured it had to do with the illustration being contoured (forgot the technical term, worm eye view?) rather being aligned.
|
|
If you follow the lines extending from the niches in the walls into the ceilings, you'll see when they cross the horizontal cylinder where the scythes are fixed. For they to be able to swing and hide inside the niches, they should have been fixed at the exact point where the cylinder crosses the niche line.
The way they are depicted, the closer scythe will hit the torch and the farther scythe will hit the middle of the second column.
Did you also notice that the scythes have no shadows? They don't interact with the light at all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I assumed you were aware that I was referring specifically to PDF purchases, since this is a thread about the quality of maps within the PDFs.
It's a total non-issue for people who don't bother buying digital copies so bringing them up in this thread is rather moot.
Guess I assumed wrong.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The bitmap quality (resolution and compression ratio) in the interactive maps pdfs is the same as in the main pdfs, or at least very very close. I've extracted bitmaps from both and done side by side comparisons. I'm guessing that the reason they are the same is that the interactive maps pdfs are made by taking the images from the main pdfs.The interactive maps are considerably lower quality. Maybe you're doing it the same way Paizo is, i.e. the wrong way?
Look here to see the significant difference:
From the adventure file to the left (decent), from its accompanying interactive maps file to the right (rubbish).
No wonder we're not getting a fix from Paizo when people keep spreading misinformation... :-(
Wow, dude. What's with the dickishness? Be nice. You're coming across as an a@#*++%. It's not helping your argument.
I don't know what map set you have extracted that image from. But in the interactive map pdfs I have, the quality is the same as the AP pdfs I have. They are all older interactive maps, perhaps things have changed with the newer ones? A lot changes over 10 years. I don't have any of the newer ones so can't tell you if that's the case.
As for telling me I'm doing it the wrong way: I'm not. I have a background in professional pre-press and know how documents are prepared for print and pdf, it's been my job. So please don't throw baseless ad hominem attacks around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They are all older interactive maps, perhaps things have changed with the newer ones?My point is: don't assert facts about the current situation based on old data.
In other words: you insisting there is no problem is not helping.
And you being obnoxious is not helping either.
Which interactive map(s) specifically have the problem you are describing?
I can vouch for the interactive maps of book 1 of the extinction curse being of a lower quality than the main pdf, to the point where I'm not entirely sure what the use of it is. I can't use them for online games, at the very least.
Personally, I wouldn't mind having maps as individual images for VTT usage. I don't know if that's possible or comes with it's own issues but it would increase usability for me by a mile.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
In other words: you insisting there is no problem is not helping.
How helpful do you think it is to hijack a thread and tell everyone else with different problems to shut up and talk about yours?
How helpful is it to disparage Paizo’s professionalism and approach without (apparently) understanding their publicly available information as to why it is the way it is?
How helpful is it to approach every issue in a combative, confrontational manner rather than acknowledging that you have one opinion amongst many?
How is that all working out for you? Are you getting what you want?
This thread is full of people telling one another how they should post. To me, it’s no wonder it’s got zero answers from Paizo (although Marc Radle posted some great info early, imo).
Personally, I wouldn't mind having maps as individual images for VTT usage. I don't know if that's possible or comes with it's own issues but it would increase usability for me by a mile.
You can just take a screenshot of the interactive map you need, with the numbers and grid turned off. Or have the numbers and grid off and print out the pdf - or print it out to a file not a printer.
Those are decent options for when the issue with low-res images is resolved, sure.
Those are decent options for when the issue with low-res images is resolved, sure.
Sure. Personally I think, even when that issue is fixed, the maps files are lower quality than they could / should be. I understand that keeping them small for the Module pdfs is important, but the interactive map PDFs would benefit from being much larger. Or switch to vector maps and make the whole pixelation problem disappear (but give the artists a challenge).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you very much.Summary: there is a major quality problem with the interactive maps from Age of Ashes part 3 onwards. Before that the map quality in the interactive maps is on a par with the module pdfs. From AoA part 3 onwards there is extreme pixelation.
I was half expecting an apology with that, since you were interjecting rudely about all the interactive maps pdfs being a problem. When it's just the most recent half-dozen. But I guess you're more interested in feeling vindicated than paying attention to how your behaviour creates negative responses from others. Good luck with that.
You can get the same map without layers from the PDF directly (at least I´m using TokenTool to extract them without a problem).
Does that take the grid out? I’d like to be able to extract a gridless map.
One thing to have in mind, if Paizo sells high res maps for use in VTT. Are they going to damage 3rd parties who do that right now? (like Fantasy Grounds with the AP). Maybe they have signed something with those kind of companies, so Paizo can´t publish high res maps.
I don’t know in this, specific case but I think I remember an offhand comment from Vic Wertz that none of their licenses have exclusivity clauses (except for the licensed novels through Tor publishing, at the time).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty sure the Interactive Maps recent resolution problem is a bug in their automatic packaging of the PDFs. Many early book's early PDF had bugs like that. My Gods & Magic PDF have one of the god with a very pixelated image.
Does that take the grid out? I’d like to be able to extract a gridless map.
My own tool does, because the grid is added on top of it (that's why the interactive map can remove the grid). BUT Paizo have some tendency to have the interior floors having patterns that fit the grid (AoA citadel stone floor have 5ft by 5ft stone squares).
I will have to look at my extracted maps from recent APs (as I know the grids are not baked in in the Interactives Maps, but I don't remember if it's the same for the maps in the main PDF.)
Creative Director
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Disclaimer: I'm not involved in the process that builds the interactive maps, so I have no insights into how things work or why they do, but folks who have feedback for how we present maps should post that feedback in threads for the actual products or the product discussion forum rather in the General Discussion folder for Pathfinder Second Edition. That will help those who can solve those problems directly see that feedback more efficiently.
That said...
Yes, our cartographers could create files that are enormous and have a native resolution equivalent to a flip-mat, but those resulting files would be enormous, and would require more (and more efficient) computing power and storage in both the short and long run than is required for handling our current workflow. (It's important to remember that a flip mat is a relatively small in-world area; maps at that scale/resolution for one Adventure Path installment would often result in files, if they were printed out, would create maps the size of living rooms or several parking spot places; and that means two to three times a month across our product lines selling and storing and transmitting ENORMOUS files, the virtual logistics of which are, honestly, beyond me to calculate.)
In closing, we ARE aware of the demand for higher resolution maps for virtual table tops, and the sudden increase in folks playing on VTTs is an unexpected jump in demand. I'll certainly mention this thread in my manager meeting today with the rest of folks, but I don't expect instant solutions. In the meantime, please continue to be patient.
But I don´t get what is the intended use of the Interactive maps.
Iirc, when they were introduced, they were intended for GMs to show on a screen at a table and reveal things as the party discovered them. They were specifically not for VTTs; people asking the question were told to use the maps directly from the adventure PDF for that purpose.
That said...** spoiler omitted **...
Thank you for the feedback James. Having the same issues here I appreciate it's not easy to run things smoothly in the current situation. I've been finding the maps in the main PDFs are good enough for VTT use, not perfect but usable. But I haven't used the interactive map pdfs that seem to have had some compression issues in the last few versions.
I am curious if you had maybe considered vector (illustrator) maps as a possible solution in some situations? I drew a set of maps for Korvosa castle for my home game to print out poster size. You get exactly the a somewhat cleaner look and feel but the files are very light and print any size with no pixelation .
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am curious if you had maybe considered vector (illustrator) maps as a possible solution in some situations? I even drew a set of maps for Korvosa castle to see if it could work. You get exactly the a somewhat cleaner look and feel but the files are very light and print any size with no pixelation .
What our cartographers use to create their maps is up to them, not to me.
For my personal maps for home games, or for turnovers to cartographers when I create maps for my own adventures to be published or when I re-draw freelancer maps for the cartographer to work with (this happens a lot, alas), I usually hand draw my maps, scan them, then touch them up with Pixelmator (my art program of choice).
I've used CAD programs to create maps as well, but fell out of that habit one I shifted to macs as my preferred PC, and I've always preferred the more organic and artistic look of a map that's hand-drawn (either on paper or in a photoshop-like program) over CAD maps for RPGs anyway.
That map for Castle Korvosa looks great, and I LOVE when adventure writers provide map turnovers to me for adventures with that level of clarity and skill, but I still prefer the more artistic looking maps akin to what we publish in print. CAD maps look anachronistic to me in a fantasy-based game, I guess.
In any event, vector maps are not currently the favored style for our products.
I've always preferred the more organic and artistic look of a map that's hand-drawn
Same here. We mostly play using a large lined (office) flp chart and pens. Which also taps into the 'mapping' part of old school d&d. But sometimes I like to break out shiny printed maps for set piece moments. Vector makes drawing and printing out a huge map much less of a headache in those moments.
My impression based on what is liked most in places like reddit is that overall the textured hand-drawn artistic style maps are most popular. Vector is a bit too clean for some. But also the over textured heavily photoshopped style is not so popular either. Detailed but clearly hand drawn or painted seems to win out overall, in other words.
Having said that, people have started to make stunning maps based on 3d models. Level designers for video games making maps on the side I think. But that would be very labour intensive for a printed rpg. They are doing well for VTT animated maps with Patreon followers.
I assumed you were aware that I was referring specifically to PDF purchases, since this is a thread about the quality of maps within the PDFs.
No, this is a thread about the image quality of art in the core rulebook PDFs that has been migrated into a duplicate of the last pdf map thread, and the one before that, and the one before that, and oh yes, the one before that.
|
Creative Director
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wheels have been kicked and we're looking at ways to get high resolution maps out in a more reliable and efficient manner. And from the office of expectation management: It might take a while to figure it out. It might not even be possible, given the size of these map files and the number of them we've built up over the last 12 years or so for Pathfinder...
Wheels have been kicked and we're looking at ways to get high resolution maps out in a more reliable and efficient manner. And from the office of expectation management: It might take a while to figure it out. It might not even be possible, given the size of these map files and the number of them we've built up over the last 12 years or so for Pathfinder...
Smells like a Humble Bundle opportunity, possibly? For all the prior maps at high resolution I'd dig deep, personally. Office of expectation management notwithstanding but withstanding. 12 years of high quality maps is a dragon's hoard in these roll20 / fantasygrounds days.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Getting this kinda stuff out there in a VTT-usable format is the sorta thing I salivate over. I greatly approve of this development.
Wheels have been kicked and we're looking at ways to get high resolution maps out in a more reliable and efficient manner. And from the office of expectation management: It might take a while to figure it out. It might not even be possible, given the size of these map files and the number of them we've built up over the last 12 years or so for Pathfinder...
This is amazing news, thanks! I’m certainly not expecting prior maps to get this treatment as that would be a massive undertaking, but I think it’d be a useful thing to start including moving forwards whenever you get your business processes ironed out for doing so.
My personal preference is that a hypothetical .zip file download for maps simply includes a folder with one .jpg image per map (with no watermark or any of the text layers — basically exactly what you would get image-wise from extracting the map from the AP pdf). Resolution doesn’t need to be anywhere near flip-mat quality since those are made for print, but exporting them say 72dpi instead of 300dpi or whatever the flip-mat resolution is would be nice. Could also set jpg quality at 90% to further reduce file size without making a very noticeable difference in how crisp the maps look.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Such simple advice for all of us that would improve the forums immensely. I should write this on a sticky note and fix it to my keyboard..
It's great to hear that Paizo are thinking of this - thanks for listening to the community (despite the occasional bout of bickering!) and communicating with us!
I hope this is what you're asking for:https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42yxj?Interactive-Maps-Poor-Quality
Cheers!
No, he recommends that threads about issues like this to be in the product forums or the specific AP forum, not the Customer Service forums or the General Discussion forums
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Glad to hear that wheels have been kicked! The resolution thing hasn't bothered me much, but it has bothered me some, and mostly for maps. (Everything else is generally fine for me, really; it's just those danged maps!) So while I'm not going to lead anyone on a map resolution crusade I am excited to see that there might be improvement to be had!
Also, I would totally be in on paying for the entirely-hypothetical-at-best package of higher-resolution maps from existing products. And images too, why not? You guys contract out for so much art that a collection of the original images at their original resolutions, without the cropping that so often happens off the edges of pages, would be a really amazing resource.
Please just release an art book with everything in it. :)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In fairness, I'd pay pretty reasonable money to get access to the art...but I suspect I'm in the minority of most gamers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In fairness, I'd pay pretty reasonable money to get access to the art...but I suspect I'm in the minority of most gamers.
I'd buy a subscription to just art files if they offered it, so I'm with you in that minority, I guess.
I have always wanted the higher res version as I do get the PDFs and printing or using them in a VTT they look pretty horrid compared to how they look in my AP book. Thanks James Jacobs for at least looking into it. I am definitely interested in having a way to get these maps however that may work.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Add me as another to the list of wishing for high resolution AP maps. I've been disappointed for years that the often awesome looking maps weren't really usable for VTT.