Grass with micro-polygon displacement

Hi… Again, long time without posting on this forums (work is crazy around here)…

I’ve been testing Blender’s Render branch from time to time and in general is still very buggy and unstable, but today in an hour of “free” time I did this quick test and I’m pretty satisfied for a “quick” test.

I used a plane subdivided + a Subsurf modifier, polygon subdivision activated (Render Branch), GI and some simple node work for color corrections and vignetting (all procedural).

Nothing photo realistic but I think it worth the post :slight_smile:

I’m pleasantly surprised that Blender’s micro-polygon displacement is better and easier to use than Max/mental ray’s… Great work devs!

Image uploaded with

You should be aware that currently the displacement feature doesn’t keep the polygons together and as a result the faces seperate and float instead of being a unified object.

A lot of stuff in the Durian movie also doesn’t seem to use per-tile displacement even though it could be used.

That looks really interesting, I would love to see a comparison with particle grass. What was the render time? Is it realistic for animation?

As with all Blender grass, it never looks real because the particle system does not seem to be able to create truly random heights or sizes.

About the renderer. Try a sculpt with an opening (an opened mouth). A door, a window, a cave. Fatal error IMO. I also copy Atom, he’s right. Blender 2.5 has long way to go.

That’s not particles, it’s displacement, it’s different.

Hair particles in Blender 2.5 are already capable of creating random lengths and apply simple gravity, it’s just that those options aren’t as close to each other as they were in 2.49.

michalis, what do you mean?

All right, late reply but here’s a short video of the scene with camera movement in HD resolution… There’s some jumping on the displacement but is not that horrible and would most probably be solved with some more fiddling of the parameters… Again, I’m very satistied with the results.

@AD: I’m very conscious about the mesh tearing on the micro-polygon displacment. That’s something inherent in most of the micro-polygon displacement solutions out there. Mental ray’s displacement also shows mesh tearing.

@All: remember this was just a 1 hour scene. With some more time, I’m pretty sure results could reach near photo realism on medium distance shots.

BTW, rendertimes for each frame was 5 minutes. Quite good in my opinion.

An interesting image but imo there is too much blur/distortion in the foreground. The middle-to-background looks ok though.

For those that asked about particle grass, I have actually just posted an image today that I made with particle grass.

The scene is very simple, just a fractal subdivided plane with subsurf and 3 particle systems (short grass, long grass and flowers) with two spot lamps overhead and a sky image. It is based on a BlenderGuru tutorial but I had to play around several hours with settings as some stuff has changed in 2.5 A2 (or at least, didn’t work the way it did in the vid).

Anyway, the base particle layer has 8000 particles with 150 children, the second has 300 with 2 children, and the third uses a group of three flower models randomized and has 175 particles with 5 children. Render time for a 1920x1080 still was under 2 minutes on a dual-core Celeron T3100 laptop. For a more complicated scene I can imagine I would probably have a smaller grass area or would have to reduce some settings to get fast renders for animation.


michalis, what do you mean?

Try it first, what is this weird lighting inside the opening (hole) ? Is this GI? I see only color bleeding nothing else. What am I doing wrong? But this render here looks wrong too. I’m testing some other renderers now, too expensive though. Blender needs a good renderer and some nice modeling tools. Some quality at last.

@ michalis don’t give up on the internal, it is quite capable as durian is busy proving. I have seen nice grass with blender, Andrew Price settled that last year with his grass tutorial, do you want better results than that? :eek: