Quote from: Tangled-Universe on August 24, 2019, 04:39:48 AMQuote from: WAS on August 23, 2019, 03:35:00 PMSo because the geometry is different, it changes the entire texture through filtering?
And this effect is not a problem in PT rendering at normal settings we often use, probably I guess due to the PT noise in general.
No the geometry is not different, the way the geometry is being evaluated by SR or defer all (DA)/PT is different.
Matt and I pointed that out pretty clearly I think.
You seem to stick on the idea that defer all and PT are different in this, they are not.
Quote from: WAS on August 23, 2019, 03:35:00 PMThe issue I'm trying to point out that no one here is grasping, is we cannot build shaders in TG for the renderers we're moving forward too. Lol It so radically changes the look of shaders, how the heck can you build for that with such a huge variance of guess work?
With the PT at normal settings we often use for SR, even with increasing AA to get rid of noise, my shaders seem to work fine, but with Defer All, they are just broken. Noise is cancelled when that's the deliberate effect of the shader using hard noise variation and contrast, micro displacement is almost entirely loss.
Seems if we're moving forward with DA/PT over SR, the entire preview system for shaders needs to be overhauled as soon as possible. Not sure why it wasn't part of updates rolling out with these features. And no, RTP isn't a good substitute for node work imo - especially when incorporating displacement into the mix.
I think our replies clearly show we actually do grasp what you are trying to say, just read again my last post with my suggested workflow.
It shows I do understand it, but that you don't like the suggestion and think -rightfully!- it should not work this way is something completely different 
There are issues with the 3D preview/RTP and how incoherent it is with deferred rendering, but mocking the difference between SR and DA/PT is based on comparing apples with oranges.
So yes, you are absolutely right about these issues/differences. Yes you are right the preview/RTP at some point should develop along with the renderer, but for now this is what it is and I offered you a workflow while trying to explain why that should work.
As an experienced TG'er all I can suggest to make things less painful for the time being, while Matt tries to improve this which is a lot of work, is to do basic quick scene setup using the SR and anywhere from texturing/shading DA and perhaps PT if you want fancy indirect lighting and/or better reflections, for instance.
Hard to compare apples and oranges when you can only grab from a pale of apples, Martin. (how you build shaders in TG inherently). All we have inhernetly are apples with different stickers. These apples are treated differently based on their sticker.
Also telling me what fractals scales can be, and trying to contradict the actual scales used (and how Matt/Oshyan/Others relate these to real-world scales and even reaffirmed to me asking questings regarding these scales in the forums), doesn't help explain anything or make you seem right, rather than making you seem wrong, and not understaning what's described as a problem. Tthat scales are very much interpreted different and thus producing different geometry on a microdisplacement scale (night and day differences).
Why is it blender can provide the same geometric detail between renderers at defined scales, even when dynamic displacement? Even PBR materials are affected in TG on a microdisplacement level. PBR materials have defined settings. No variance.
And from what i've seen just watching the forums and updates, things are happening as I find them. PT was near broken and sure enough, it was found out to be in cases where it was impossible to finish. I was mentioning this slowdown for almost 2 months, and not taken seriously, and excused. Come on.
