Creative Question!

[creativevision]

Hey Forum Users!

I'm pretty new and novice to Affinity so always appreciate the help on here. I've also noticed that many forum members have a good out-of-the-box thinking approach, so thought I'd ask my question.

I basically want to use the attached image to create 5 new images ... each of them highlighting North, South, East, West or Central London.

So somehow I want to be able to choose parts of the map, and then make that part stand out more than the rest. The selection doesn't have to be precisely along the marked borough borders, and in fact probably shouldn't be. For example my South version may include some of the Richmond Borough area as will the West London version.

So it can be rough markers that sort of follow the boroughs, but may overlap ... what's more important is the overall image should look interesting and exciting and obviously be highlighting in an attractive way, it's own part of London (ie North, South, East, West of Central).

 

 

[GarryP]

Do you have a vector version of the map of do you only have a raster version?

Who are the audience for the new map?

How will the new map be displayed/seen/used?

What do you mean by “stand out more than the rest”?
And what should happen to the stuff that doesn’t “stand out”, if anything?

[v_kyr]

As bitmap or vectors here? - There are probably many things possible, one would be to emphasize the regions of interest in an overlaid text marker like coloring fashion. Or surrounding those with some emphasized linings, or let them flow (place them) slightly bigger emphasized shown on top of the rest ... etc. etc.

[creativevision]

Just to add, the attached shows the sorts of areas I'd highlight as North, South, East, West and Central. Of course there's some missing areas near the centre in my mark up, but as mentioned, I'd be happy for each of the highlights to be slightly vague at the edges, so these would be covered.

[creativevision]

10 minutes ago, GarryP said:

Do you have a vector version of the map of do you only have a raster version?

Who are the audience for the new map?

How will the new map be displayed/seen/used?

What do you mean by “stand out more than the rest”?
And what should happen to the stuff that doesn’t “stand out”, if anything?

Great questions! Unfortunately I only have that version, but am looking into whether I can get a vector version (never know how to use those so don't download them even when presented as an option ;0)

End results will go on a website so end one should be optimised WebP at around 100Kb max. Will be viewed on Desktops and Mobiles ... basically they'll form the header image for 5 different webpages, each dealing with North, South, East, West and Central London coverage zones

So when user visits the page for North London, they'd see a version of the above image but with something that clearly shows the North London areas (as roughly marked by the ellipse in my other image) highlighted somehow. 

The most ideal would perhaps be an animated WebP that repeatedly magnifies that elliptical area ... but no idea if that's OTT or even whether it could be done within 100Kb per image

[creativevision]

Actually, yes I have the vector! Attached but as mentioned I have no idea on how to work with vector files 🤔

map-of-london-boroughs.eps

[GarryP]

Thanks for the extra information.

The image you supplied looks a little large (dimension-wise) for a web page header, especially on mobile.
What will the dimensions of the image be when it’s used?

[creativevision]

5 minutes ago, GarryP said:

Thanks for the extra information.

The image you supplied looks a little large (dimension-wise) for a web page header, especially on mobile.
What will the dimensions of the image be when it’s used?

We've been using images at 600px x 600px and they seem to fit the template design quite well. Agree it's a bit big for a mobile, but the template makes it look ok. On a mobile (in portrait orientation) it basically shows the website menu bar, followed by the square image (full width) and then has about 2/5 of the screen left (above the fold as it were) to show some intro text for the page

[v_kyr]

[thomaso]

[GarryP]

I think my first idea might be to go for a simple Black and White Adjustment and then paint with a ‘Spray Can’ brush onto the mask of the Adjustment layer (the layer itself).

My attached image shows where I have used three different brushes as an experiment showing three highlighted areas at the same time.
Probably not great but it’s quick to try and some ideas may come out of it.

[creativevision]

5 minutes ago, GarryP said:

I think my first idea might be to go for a simple Black and White Adjustment and then paint with a ‘Spray Can’ brush onto the mask of the Adjustment layer (the layer itself).

My attached image shows where I have used three different brushes as an experiment showing three highlighted areas at the same time.
Probably not great but it’s quick to try and some ideas may come out of it.

I like the idea of B&Wing (is that even a word?!) the irrelevant areas ... let me try and see how it looks, thank you!

[creativevision]

15 minutes ago, thomaso said:

I like the one on the right, is it easy to do?!

 

•  

[thomaso]

8 minutes ago, creativevision said:

I like the one on the right, is it easy to do?!

Very easy. v1105 map detail.afpub

[David in Яuislip]

Oops

[GarryP]

13 minutes ago, creativevision said:

is there an easy way I could perhaps insert my ellipses as masks so that when I spray paint, it only stays within the elliptical area?

I would probably just do it by eye using a shape as a visual ‘boundary’ – see attached video.
You can use different Adjustments (turning each off and on as necessary) to build up the different areas.

[creativevision]

Thank you both @GarryP and @thomaso ... I ended up using the Vector file (that GarryP gave me confidence to use LOL) and also applying thomaso's idea ... and I'm happy with it!

 

 

[Pšenda]

[v_kyr]

53 minutes ago, creativevision said:

I ended up using the Vector file (that GarryP gave me confidence to use LOL) and also applying thomaso's idea ...

A wise decision to use a vector representation here, since that can usually be scaled up/down to your needs without loosing any quality, as far as all is kept as plain vectors on it's export and nothing is rasterized here then.