I want to begin paying for Megascan subscription but having issues with the displacement maps and this stepping effect -
I've also uploded this test scene https://we.tl/l9dvjttiLw
It just seems to be Megascan textures that are the issue, as I have an account at poliigon and they go in just fine.
I'm assuming this has something to do with the bitdepth and how Octane is interpreting the file. I've tried using the EXR but that doesn't seem to be supported by Octane. Also tried adding object tag with subdivs in hope that it was lack of polygons to displace but nothing seems to fix or reduce it.
Any ideas?
Stepping on Megascan displacement
Moderators: ChrisHekman, aoktar
- mikeadamwood
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:51 am
Windows 11 Pro | ASUS Pro WSX80E | AMD Threadripper Pro 5975WX 32-Core | 256GB Micron 8x32GB 3200MHz ECC | 2x PNY RTX6000 ADA
I've experienced this before. Here are a few tips:
First, these scans aren't meant to be stretched 50 cm in height. You will inevitably get stepping. I'm guessing you were doing that in your example to really highlight the stepping. Displacement (especially when coming from a bitmap) is pixel based. It will read over each pixel and push the geometry up or down. So the bigger you stretch your texture or the higher you increase the displacement height, you will start seeing the individual pixels separating from their neighbors (stepping). In addition to that, you have the sample size set to 8k when the texture is 4k. The shader is looking at the same pixel twice in essentially the same spot, resulting in even more stepping.
8192x8192 4096x4096
A few ways to fix this:
1. These types of displacement maps are not meant to be focused on. Don't expect to be able to focus on a single leaf on the ground and have it be photo real.
2. Stay within a reasonable height. A few sites even provide the accurate height to use.
3. Use the same sample size as your image size.
4. If it's feeling muddy still, try tiling the texture.
5. That bright sunlight doesn't really help. These things look pretty good when they can cast shadows on themselves. Full illumination highlights their flaws.
6. If for some reason you're getting weird ripping or you still see some stepping, try setting the filter type to Gaussian.
Filter Type None Filter Type Gaussian With all that in mind, you should be able to get this:
Hope this helps.
First, these scans aren't meant to be stretched 50 cm in height. You will inevitably get stepping. I'm guessing you were doing that in your example to really highlight the stepping. Displacement (especially when coming from a bitmap) is pixel based. It will read over each pixel and push the geometry up or down. So the bigger you stretch your texture or the higher you increase the displacement height, you will start seeing the individual pixels separating from their neighbors (stepping). In addition to that, you have the sample size set to 8k when the texture is 4k. The shader is looking at the same pixel twice in essentially the same spot, resulting in even more stepping.
8192x8192 4096x4096
A few ways to fix this:
1. These types of displacement maps are not meant to be focused on. Don't expect to be able to focus on a single leaf on the ground and have it be photo real.
2. Stay within a reasonable height. A few sites even provide the accurate height to use.
3. Use the same sample size as your image size.
4. If it's feeling muddy still, try tiling the texture.
5. That bright sunlight doesn't really help. These things look pretty good when they can cast shadows on themselves. Full illumination highlights their flaws.
6. If for some reason you're getting weird ripping or you still see some stepping, try setting the filter type to Gaussian.
Filter Type None Filter Type Gaussian With all that in mind, you should be able to get this:
Hope this helps.
- mikeadamwood
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:51 am
Thanks for the indepth reply extralush!
I should of noticed the displacement set to 8k instead of the 4k option, I think this is just a habit of mine.
I have figured out a slightly cumbersome workaround after trying to reexport the exr from photoshop to try and convert it to 16bit but my Photoshop seems to leave the party as soon as I open a .exr file.
The workaround involved re-exporting the maps from Megascan studio, the exr seems to work after this which gives me much better results, albeit a little more labour intensive. I'm not sure why it works after this but I tried a few and it worked every time.
Thanks again!
I should of noticed the displacement set to 8k instead of the 4k option, I think this is just a habit of mine.
I have figured out a slightly cumbersome workaround after trying to reexport the exr from photoshop to try and convert it to 16bit but my Photoshop seems to leave the party as soon as I open a .exr file.
The workaround involved re-exporting the maps from Megascan studio, the exr seems to work after this which gives me much better results, albeit a little more labour intensive. I'm not sure why it works after this but I tried a few and it worked every time.
Thanks again!

Windows 11 Pro | ASUS Pro WSX80E | AMD Threadripper Pro 5975WX 32-Core | 256GB Micron 8x32GB 3200MHz ECC | 2x PNY RTX6000 ADA
I was wondering if it was partly due to the jpeg compression in that original image. While it is 4K, it looked highly compressed.
OSX 10.12.4 | Intel 12 core @ 3.33 ghz | 128 gb ram | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080TI | Ubuntu Linux slave with 3x 1080ti
- Antoncromas
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 3:53 pm
Megascans used a single channel EXRs for the displacement on older assets. Octane gives a failure once it cant detect G and B channels. You can open a photoshop and copy the Red channel to blue and red and save out the EXR. 32 bit displacement will give you best results. You still cant get extreme close up and make it look photoreal as other people stated.