Author Topic: Corona 5 - 2.5D Displacement on Curves  (Read 2535 times)

2019-11-19, 11:49:23
Reply #45

romullus

  • Global Moderator
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 6371
  • Let's move this topic, shall we?
    • View Profile
    • My Models
Displacement is at 1px in both cases.

You need to set lower screen size in 2.5D displacement, or higher in classic one, to get comparable results. If i'm not mistaken, the ratio is about 1:1,5 So 1px classic displacement, should have about the same quality as 0,67px 2.5D displacement.
I'm not Corona Team member. Everything i say, is my personal opinion only.
My Models | My Videos | My Pictures

2019-11-19, 14:00:00
Reply #46

matsu

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
Hey Matsu, what is the topology of your plane? Is it equally subdivided, can you please provide a wireframe?

It's a plane primitive 3x3m, 30x30 division (+Noise modifier Scale=20 Strength Z=60mm) - so 100x100mm squares. Adding wireframe.

Quote from: romullus
You need to set lower screen size in 2.5D displacement, or higher in classic one, to get comparable results. If i'm not mistaken, the ratio is about 1:1,5 So 1px classic displacement, should have about the same quality as 0,67px 2.5D displacement.

Adding comparison on 0.5px. The artifact is still there, but not as pronounced.

2019-11-19, 14:16:05
Reply #47

GeorgeK

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 224
  • George
    • View Profile
Hey Matsu, what is the topology of your plane? Is it equally subdivided, can you please provide a wireframe?

It's a plane primitive 3x3m, 30x30 division (+Noise modifier Scale=20 Strength Z=60mm) - so 100x100mm squares. Adding wireframe.

Quote from: romullus
You need to set lower screen size in 2.5D displacement, or higher in classic one, to get comparable results. If i'm not mistaken, the ratio is about 1:1,5 So 1px classic displacement, should have about the same quality as 0,67px 2.5D displacement.

Adding comparison on 0.5px. The artifact is still there, but not as pronounced.

So yeah everything seems fine I suspect the usage of noise modifier with 2.5D, I will test this a bit further to see bad it can get, thanks.
“Every artist was first an amateur”

2019-11-19, 15:20:39
Reply #48

matsu

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
I've tried with and without noise mod; with different textures; RWS and not - it persists. Even tried world size displacement.

But I think it's strange you get this obvious repeating/tiling pattern. With the old displacement you could just lower the quality - sure, you'd lose detail, but you wouldn't get artifacts like this. If you can reproduce it, I hope you can sort it out.

2019-11-27, 23:30:36
Reply #49

dj_buckley

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Just wondered if there was any progress with this.

I think my biggest question is which displacement is correct in terms of depth.

Tesselated geometry seems to give more definition to the displacement - when you look at my tests and can see untesselated next to tesselated.  It makes the untesselated surface look quote flat.

So is untesselated correct in terms of depth.

Or

Is tesselated correct in terms of depth, but incorrect with regards artifacts?