Quote - Quick technical question for (probably) Paolo.  For Reality's purposes..what's better to use, Bump maps or displacement maps?

Let me prefix that there is no "better", it all depends on what you want to achieve. Second, we are talking about two different technologies here. Bump maps simulate the shading that would happen on a surface if that surface had been displaced. For example, if you have an armor and that armor had been decorated by chiseling grooves in the metal, the surface would have been displaced, moved. If you have a displacement map that simulates the chiseling then you will get more convincing effects by using the displacement map. On the oher hand that will take a lot more memory and time to render. If your armor is not prominently shown in the frame then a bump map will do. A bump map does not displace the surface, it simply simulates the shading that would have occoured if that surface would have been displaced. It's a trick but often it works.

For me the best solution is Normal Maps. A NM is more sophisticated than a bump map and it provides a much better simulation. At the same time it does not take as long as displacement.

Please note that these technologies are not exclusive. You can, as it happens often, use a Bump Map or a Normal Map together with a Displacement Map. In fact, using a rough D.M. in conjunction with a N.M. is a great trick to create very convicing effects. The N.M. generates the minute surface shading while the D.M. can do some rough diaplcement of the surface so that such surface looks good when the edges are clearly visible. The edges are what break the illusion when using Bump Maps or Normal Maps.

Hope this helps.

Paolo

https://www.preta3d.com
FB: https://www.facebook.com/RealityPlugIn
Tw: @preta3d
G+: https://plus.google.com/106625816153304163119
The Reality Gallery: https://reality-plug-in.deviantart.com