mojave wrote:Thank you for your feedback,
For feature requests/improvements please use the feature request system so we can have a feel of how many users are interested in this. This has already been highlighted there:
https://render.otoy.com/requests/?qa=44 ... how=44#q44
If there's anything that you can't find please create a new request.
noisyboyuk wrote:Yeah I have to agree, displacement mapping is literally a basic requirement of any decent production render engine so it's astonishing that we still don't have a robust solution yet.
Don't get me wrong - I LOVE the current implementation because it's just insanely fast but it doesn't work well on everything and that makes it unreliable. We must have an alternative solution for displacement that doesn't explode geometry, even if it means slower render times and subdivisions - particularly a solution that works great without having to unwrap UVs. Being a freelancer who has to collaborate a lot, I have licenses for Arnold, Octane, Redshift and Cycles (plus Mantra with Houdini) and Octane is the only engine that doesn't have this locked down yet. Even Cycles has it working amazingly well with micropoly displacement with triplanar blending which is amazing and surprisingly fast.
A couple years ago I could probably live without it but we live in an era of photogrametry and photo scanned textures and without getting this basic feature sorted out it's
PolderAnimation wrote:The basis stuff like displacement are so much more needed.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests