- Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:49 pm
#296997
The difference with vector displacement as oppose to normal B/W displacement is almost the same as comparing bump maps to normal maps. Except now you have the true 3rd dimension.
The reason these images haven't been as used is because of the displacement rate needed to make it work, specifically in the areas where the subdivision level on objects is low.
Once you start seeing better implementation of adaptive subdivision they will take off. IMHO Maxwell should concentrate on other things before adding this on.
Man its been a LONG time since I posted here. What version are we on? 1.7? Any news on 2.0?
Yazan
PS you can do vector displacement in 302 now. Its not specific to 401.
Thats what's nice about using modo. You can model, or image sculpt the shape you want and then extract (Or just save if you're sculpting) that image. Make sure its tillable and then use it as a vector displacement image.m-Que wrote:So, first modeled, then extracted into a vector displacement. Now I see.![]()
But that means you can't draw a map in PS for example, like with usual displacement, right? Or how does such a map look like: is it graphical or some sort of numeric file?
The difference with vector displacement as oppose to normal B/W displacement is almost the same as comparing bump maps to normal maps. Except now you have the true 3rd dimension.
The reason these images haven't been as used is because of the displacement rate needed to make it work, specifically in the areas where the subdivision level on objects is low.
Once you start seeing better implementation of adaptive subdivision they will take off. IMHO Maxwell should concentrate on other things before adding this on.
Man its been a LONG time since I posted here. What version are we on? 1.7? Any news on 2.0?
Yazan
PS you can do vector displacement in 302 now. Its not specific to 401.