Trouble with displacement

[Dynedain]

So I need a little bit of help with displacement.

2D displacement is giving me the behavior I want, except for the problem of not having the "Keep continuity" option.



3D displacement gives me the edge continuity that I need, but creates wierd artifacts with the displacement itself.



And here is the displacement map so you can see what I'm trying to accomplish:



Any suggestions?

[peterC]

Kill any blur in the map your using for displacement, thats what everybody keeps saying when talking about displacement-problems.
Hope it helps
Peter

[travistlo]

why not reverse the 2d? Dont let the white push out, pull the black in.

[Dynedain]

Already removed the blur.

Syclone did help me find a solution, which is also what travistlo suggested.

Use 2D mappping, invert the displacement map and use a negative value for the displacement amount.

[CRD]

Try adding a Subdivision modifier onto your object below the VrayDisp mod that's set to 3d.

I was having big problems with 2d vs 3d not working the same until I grasped the notion that 3d version subdivides your mesh, but if you have a single huge mesh, then the subdivision aren't small enough for the detail you want.

[flipside]

Already removed the blur.

Syclone did help me find a solution, which is also what travistlo suggested.

Use 2D mappping, invert the displacement map and use a negative value for the displacement amount.

Why would you remove the blur??

Instead of inverting, you could also use the shift parameter to shift your surfaces back.

Also read this:

http://www.seraph3d.com/bricktut.htm

read the part of the secret ingredient

Don't know if that still works, but it used to work some time ago.

[Dynedain]

Why would you remove the blur??

Because otherwise the displacement gets smoothed because of the blur, and I don't want that.

That brick tutorial is useless for what I'm doing. I was trying to figure out some of the intricacies of the vray disp modifier. A basic tutorial on mapping doesn't answer my questions.

[Seraph135]

That brick tutorial is useless for what I'm doing. I was trying to figure out some of the intricacies of the vray disp modifier. A basic tutorial on mapping doesn't answer my questions.

Did you try it? I know my tutorial is a little dated now, but I just tried that method again and it worked like a charm. Your mesh pulls apart because of the smoothing groups. If your mesh shares all the same smoothing groups then it won't tear apart. If you check "faceted" in the material it will render correctly (more or less).

The methods mentioned above are probably a better way to do this now, but back when displacement was first introduced in Vray this was the only way I could come up with to make meshes not rip apart.

Tim J

[flipside]

Why would you remove the blur??

Because otherwise the displacement gets smoothed because of the blur, and I don't want that.

That brick tutorial is useless for what I'm doing. I was trying to figure out some of the intricacies of the vray disp modifier. A basic tutorial on mapping doesn't answer my questions.

Sorry for trying to help.

For the blur, it seemed as someone suggested to remove it to make displ work, that's why I wondered why. You never mentioned that you wanted ultra sharp creases.

The tutorial is not about mapping, it's about displacement and as seraph says, it still works. I tried it too yesterday. You only have to read it instead of looking at the pictures only, that's why I mentioned to read the secret ingredient part in the hope you wouldn't skip those two lines.

About the shift parameter, that also works perfectly, 2D or 3D.

And even 3D displ works great with your map, but you need to subdivide your mesh a bit more if you work with a simple box. Otherwise you would have to increase the max subdivs value to very high values which isn't as efficient.

[Dynedain]

Sorry, I was a bit cranky yesterday. Too many things to do, not enough time.

As for the brick tutorial, it mostly ignores the settings of displacement, but I will look at the meshsmooth and/or smoothing group options.

I realize now that 3D had issues because of not enough subdivisions, but the wierd articfacting I was getting didn't make that apparent.

Anyways, I may have to drop displacement on this altogethor because of rendertime. On the other hand, I may have to include it because of simulating water pouring down the wall.

[CRD]

If, like me, you tried compensating for the lack of quaility with really high displacement settings, now that you have subdivided your mesh, you can go back to minimum displacement settings. "Minimum" all depends on how far way you are from the object, but you should be able to find a balance between quality and time.

Good luck.

Colin

[DaForce]

FYI, the brick tut way works perfectly with your displace map dynedain. Also you dont need to use meshsmooth you can just add a smooth modifier and tick smoothing group 1. Both have the same effect.