• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Software What type of software do developers use to create non-technical graphics like this?

arcplans

As Featured in "High Times"
Messages
6,639
Points
32
Cad underlay, with Adobe photoshop for colors and Adobe illustrator for lettering / type

Did these all the time during the darkside days.. since then I have only done them twice to try to "spruce" up non-profit site plans for affordable housing.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
18,602
Points
69
This is an old thread, but there's no such thing as a dead thread on Cyburbia,, so ...

This looks like it could be an Adobe Illustrator drawing. Illustrator can import AutoCad .dwg and .dxf files. AutoCad (assuming it's the source of the original subdivision plan) can also export Postscript (.eps) files, which Illustrator and some other drawing programs can import.
 
Messages
2,344
Points
20
Cad underlay, with Adobe photoshop for colors and Adobe illustrator for lettering / type
This looks like it could be an Adobe Illustrator drawing. Illustrator can import AutoCad .dwg and .dxf files. AutoCad (assuming it's the source of the original subdivision plan) can also export Postscript (.eps) files, which Illustrator and some other drawing programs can import.
I do these regularly. CAD base rendered in M-Color.
Question regarding this graphic:

The illustrated wetlands are currently in the color that looks like... errr... "swamp green".
Also, it's not too far a shade of green from those of the trees and the lots.
The overall effect, especially in the Classic Series section:
the lots look like they are surrounded by swampy wetlands!

I assume that: the designer wants The Enclave to be as visually appealing, and therefore saleable, as possible.
With this assumption in mind, how would each of you (arcplans, Dan, nrschmid)
change the graphic color design to make the complex more visually appealing to the consumer?
Feel free to get to the extremely technical nitty-gritty.
Thanks in advance!
 

nrschmid

Cyburbian
Messages
2,866
Points
21
Several things:

1. The lots are all green, which is very confusing. Generally, stick with shades of yellow. I see basically 3 different products here. The Classic Series on the south has generally the same product type. It is the largest size, so make it a lighter/more pale yellow. On the north, the Lifestyle Series has a "medium" lot size on the east side of the spine road, and a "smaller" lot size on the west side of the spine road. Make the east side a canary yellow color and the west side a few shades darker than the canary yellow to show contrast. Rule of thumb is to show a gradient of colors in single-family residential from largest lot (lighter yellow almost white) to smallest (dark yellow). This is for single-family residential and is not to be confused with single-family semi-detached, multi-family, etc. Google APA land use colors or APA zoning colors for more guidance.
2. Wetland color is generally appropriate. I would increase the brightness. It will stand out more once the lot colors are changed.
3. The overall white dashed boundary is hard to read. I would use a contrasting color (red, purple), increase the boundary width and the spacing between the dashed lines. Add a small drop shadow underneath to make it pop.
4. The cursive typeface isn't bad for a sales graphic but it's still hard to read. I would consider a sans serif font that is italicized. Can't go wrong with good old Arial or Vendana or Tahoma.
5. Show building pads on each lot. Hard to visualize where the house will go, setbacks, etc.
6. I would turn off all of the Future Lots (including single-family residential and town homes). It's not germane for a sales graphic. I would show stub streets or access arrows to show street connectivity.
7. Street labels are hard to read. They are too small and they contrast with the script typeface.
8. Aerial photo would definitely help to show context (and a vicinity or key map). Are there any creeks/streams? Is this a flat piece of land? Topo would definitely help.
9. Trail network needs to be emphasized (big selling point to potential homeowners). Increase the line width by 200% and remove the black outline. I would either keep it at white or some other contrasting color (brown or tan). Identify it as a feature in the legend.
10. Hunter Drive is probably a major thoroughfare. I only see the pavement on the north side of the median but the area to the south is cut off. Show both sides of the thoroughfare so people understand that this is a major road.
11. What is the very pale mint/white solid hatch? It's the other green that's prevalent throughout the site? I assume it's open space? I would use the green that you have on the single-family lots in the existing graphic and use that instead.
12. I see some faint lot lines on Wildflower Trail east of Basswood Road. Turn them off.

I'd love to see a revised graphic if you can post on this thread. Thanks!
 
Top