3 Most Popular Methods of using Height, Displacement or Bump Maps | Blender 2.8

Equipment:
Tripod: A Box. Legit just a cardboard box.

business inquiries or donations :)

[spittingame]

He didn't say his name, he didn't say donate to my patreon, he didn't give any shout outs, he didn't say like, comment and subscribe.
This dude got straight to the point from beginning to end.
I like this dude.

[SoapyTarantula]

I really liked how you quickly explained the pros and cons of each method. A lot of tutorial or tip videos don't really go into *why* something shouldn't be used all the time, so its a surprise to see someone that does. Well done!

[ABaumstumpf]

While height, displacement and bump-maps are all very similar they are NOT the same.
Heightmap specifically refers to the height of maps - duh - and as such is a simple 2D greyscale image. It is not even about shading or displacing but generating the actual geometry. It is very often used in games as it is a very simple yet good-enough method. (In general the landscape is represented solely by the height-map with no other data needed for the geometry, for the rendering the index in the map is directly used for x/y coordinates and the value of the map is used as the height).


Bump-mapping specifically refers to shading Only. Those maps are also just greyscale but contrary to heightmaps they are used on objects to change how they interact with light. In general this is done in the simplest for taking the gradient to the surrounding pixels as the slope of the pixel and using that to compute the brightness.


Normal-mapping commonly uses 3 channels (albite 2 channels is enough) and directly stores the normals at each pixel - so more accurate than good old bumpmapping.


And displacement-mapping is kinda like an application of height-mapping on 3D objects - allowing the actual geometry to be altered.
This can use a variety of textures and interpretation of those - the simplest is using a simple 1channel greyscale to only get the amount it should be displaced along its normal. The more powerful version is 3 channels - height + 2 normals - as that gives more control over how edges in the texture look like (You can make them hard edges or smooth curves). This of course needs actual geometry. And it also comes as a 3D displacement where the 3 channels represent a displacement along all 3 cardinal directions, making overhanging geometry and the likes possible - the most powerful variation.
As you are dealing with actual geometry here this of course is in general far more powerful but also resource-intensive of the methods so far. If you just want the nice highlights on a coin it makes no sense to have a very high poly-count and displacement-mapping when normal-mapping will basically give the same visual result. But if for example you have the outside of an old stone+wood building with rough edges then displacement really brings it to shine.
And as having all the geometry in very high detail is usually a waste of resources it is mostly used together with view-dependant tesselation: an object far away and small does not really benefit from tiny displacements, better to just tesselate the nearby objects to give them extra geometry for better visuals.




There is also parallax mapping:
bump/normal-mapping have the problem that they only affect the surface-normals, parallax-mapping also tries to compensate the texture-coordinates based on the viewing angle. If you look at actual bump/normal-mapped geometry while changing the viewing-angle you notice that only the lighting changes, the texture stays static - while with parallax-mapping you see a stronger 3D effect as it looks like the surface is experiencing parallax. But this too does break down on shallow angles as it is a simple 1 step lookup-offset (You check the texture-coordinate for its value, then use that value alongside the viewing-angle to look up a new texture-value that is far closer to what you would see if the surface was actual 3D).
This takes slightly more performance than normal-mapping (which is identical to bumpmapping in performance) but gives way better results.


And finally there is parallax occlusion mapping:
It tries to solve the inaccuracy of parallax-mapping by using an iterative process that allows for the texture to hide (occlude) it self without causing big artefacts. It is again more costly due to being an iterative multistep process (often in the range of 5-10 lookups) and breaks down at sharp corners, but on smoother bodies it gives a near identical visual result to displacement-mapping while requiring far less geometry and still usually being quit a bit faster.




The terms sadly often get mixed together, specially parallax mapping in recent years go highjacked by 2D game tinkerers with no idea what they are talking about (no, not even just confusing it with parallax scrolling but just outright making up shit).

[amirshayanmoghtaderi]

very effective and short I'm exactly searching for something like this thank you so much

[tomcollins]

This guys is ridiculously talented at keeping it simple and making it valuable. Thank you

[gummikalli]

I wish every tutorial on YouTube was like yours. To the point. Well done and thank you.

[JayJapanB]

You can also make complex meshes by applying in the displacement modifier then decimating the mesh. Can be useful if you want to break a shape or silhouette up without massive polycounts.

[IceForgeOfficial]

I love how short but thorough this video is on the levels of texturing you can do and the pros and cons! Great video!

[IbrahimYounes]

2:44 (those who are coming from 3Ds Max, this part is what you need)

this is one of the most mature amazing straight to the F**ing point video I ever watch, it was very helpfull, thank you very much!

[WhimZyHasAYouTubeChannel]

nice tutorial but you are too fast navigating the menu

[greensamurai]

This video was extremely informative and straight to the point !

[kutfingertv]

Its 1 minute 30 seconds in, and I have got the initial results I was after just by following what was done on screen. Thank you for being so concise.

[Michael-kvbg]

Dude, bless you! Not a 30 minute tutorial, but a simple, straight forward 4:41 minute tutorial. Holy shit!

[WrldCitizen]

I've been watching a LOT of the hell people call it tutorials and until this one it never worked for me! Thanks Damian! Keep them coming!

[GrandThriftAuto]

I’d kinda worked this out from watching bits of other tutorials but this is definitely the simplest, clearest and most helpful explanation of the hows and whys of the different techniques. Thanks! Subbed 👍

[michaelsokov]

you are a genius, thank you, this is what I needed for the stage

also in 4 minutes

[spiderjerusalem]

This is one of the best tutorials I've ever seen, instant subscribe

[EIendir]

Most efficient and useful tutorial seen so far ! many thanks

[kspmn]

This channel is like a hidden gem in plain sight! Really one of the top ones i've found so far! Congratulations for all the epicness!!!!

[rzammmdov]

Very and the most effective and realistic way!Thank you so much)