OTOY Forums

yes, you can see it in this video:
[vimeo]http://www.vimeo.com/94517190[/vimeo]

Very nice.

Gonna ask if we can have the same in Maya.

cheers.

aoktar wrote:your are still expecting magic via a low res image. Check my picture, displacement source image which is produced by a gradient

Therefore, each grayscale image has stairs?
Unless one uses the shaders of C4D.
Can you increase then maybe the resolution to 16k and/or 32 k, so that the stairs are really tiny?

Rudi wrote:

aoktar wrote:your are still expecting magic via a low res image. Check my picture, displacement source image which is produced by a gradient

Therefore, each grayscale image has stairs?
Unless one uses the shaders of C4D.
Can you increase then maybe the resolution to 16k and/or 32 k, so that the stairs are really tiny?

Rudi,
Don't wanna understand? It's user problem not related with plugin.
It's not issue of resolution. You should use high res. images as at least of displacement resolution. And 32bit images are better.

Hello,

Now work correctly.
octane ver 2.05 and octanec4d ver 2.05.

Thank you for the support.

centropolis

aoktar wrote:

Rudi wrote:

aoktar wrote:your are still expecting magic via a low res image. Check my picture, displacement source image which is produced by a gradient

Therefore, each grayscale image has stairs?
Unless one uses the shaders of C4D.
Can you increase then maybe the resolution to 16k and/or 32 k, so that the stairs are really tiny?

Rudi,
Don't wanna understand? It's user problem not related with plugin.
It's not issue of resolution. You should use high res. images as at least of displacement resolution. And 32bit images are better.

I believe, now I have understood it.

However, one cannot refine then the Displacement resolution even further, with 16384, instead of 8192 now.

I mean the result.
For what, otherwise, one has then the choice of 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096 and 8192.

You seem to be missing basic understanding of the process. Please refer to this document and, once again, read all the answeres you got so far.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_mapping

If this does not help - nobody here can.

Best,
Dobs

Hi Achmed,

I believe, we speak sometimes again each other past.
Therefore, here sometimes the pictures what I generally mean.
And why I ask whether it does not go still higher than 8192x8192.
With 8192x8192 many your details which are not to be seen with 4094x496 are shown.
Did it should not with 16384x16384 even more give to see?

Greetings Rudi

8192 is limit of Octane. you should live with it

aoktar wrote:8192 is limit of Octane. you should live with it

Thus done theme.

Thanks for your help and patience. Even if we talk at cross-purposes from time to time sometimes .