Timeline for Drawing rivers on a continental scale map
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2018 at 9:34 | comment | added | Akirus | It may be hard to see since I had to lower the quality of the image a lot to post it on imgur, but I actually have two different Wilbur river renders of different river lengths. The second render shows as different coloured extensions of the first. I've been using that to try to determine the 'big' rivers' but Wilbur still renders everything 1px wide so it's hard to tell still. I'll try Ghajini's approach using drainage basins and see how it goes. | |
| May 1, 2018 at 9:04 | comment | added | walrus | Hmm, do you have any other heuristics you can use to narrow it down? I can't really answer for you at what point a river becomes important enough to map, but you could try splitting the rivers into two or more arbitrary categories (E.G. 'big' and 'small'), and putting each type onto different layers to help you visualise. | |
| May 1, 2018 at 9:00 | comment | added | Akirus | I agree with you, but my main problem is deciding what scale of river should be deemed important; I've been agonizing about it for days and haven't figured out the approach I want to take yet. The Wilbur render gives a huge number of rivers that I'm trying to narrow down and it's driving me mad deciding what to keep and hide. I considered and dismissed the idea of drawing it to scale pretty quickly for the reason you stated. Beyond that, I'm at a loss as to how to determine what a meaningful size cutoff for a river would be, and how to even assign a scale to each river on the render. | |
| May 1, 2018 at 8:45 | history | answered | walrus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |