Quote from: Matt on October 29, 2019, 05:18:49 PMQuote from: WAS on October 29, 2019, 05:00:31 PMBoth methods very clearly describe the same end results, not effecting geometry, by simulating the lighting via normals. Both results yield the same non-edited geometry (the sphere is still smooth as well as the casted shadow)
Yes.
Quote from: undefinedIn TG it's creating displacement, which is seen along the object, and in the shadows.
If you see the silhouette of the object change, this is displacement. In Terragen that will happen with displaceable objects. That was Hannes's sphere on the right. But Hannes's sphere on the left was just bump mapping.
Quote from: undefinedWhich results in weird looking objects it seems, especially with light interaction.
Yeah, that is the main problem with bump mapping.
Quote from: undefinedAt which point does this become displacement, and not simulated bumpiness of light? The height map method says it's used to get the normals, for the lighting. Not using it for actual physical displacement.
Correct, bump mapping just changes the normals for lighting. This is what Hannes's left sphere shows.
Hannes's sphere on the left very clearly has displacement... you can see in on the sides of the sphere and shadow, though. So I don't understand. This isn't "Bump" mapping, which is simulating bumpiness of lighting only.
Even in my
ray traced example, it's very clearly creating displacement, very weirdly, I might add, over the same normal map simply converted to depth.
The way it is now, seems like it's own thing, trying to create displacement from a bump map, rather than lighting. For example, some materials of objects that use displacement and bump. You'd get strange results with the added displacement playing with light on top of the simulating lighting effect it should be doing, as the displacement is suppose to be the actual geometry/mesh adjustment, not the bump.
---
When I zoom into the Normal Map version, it creates near back depression shadows where it should be fairly subtle, over the actual diffuse of the object (Fabric31). Is this because it's simulating lighting
on top of creating displacement? Cause it looks bad.