"I also think it would be more convenient for forum members getting Mt5 setups instead of complex screenshots of setups that they almost cant figure out  how they got built, ending up to give up, for the one who is giving a solution it is also the better choice to drop a Mt5 sample rather then making screens and trying to explain the cause, for most it just needs to work in a simple way. "

Indeed!

I've completely given up on "Supafly" for various reasons, but this is one of them.

I still remember all those tiresome Firefly discussions and the hours I spent trying to recreate the spaghetti code when BagginsBill posted his latest weekly "discovery".

Lol.

This is the exact same scenario.

Lots of poking around in the dark, because:

1. Supahfly, even in it's third iteration, is still not properly functional. resp. implemented.

2. Very few people actually DO understand what they are doing in the material room.

3. Many of those few completely underestimate the level of "I'm just a hobbyist wanting to render pretty things and can't be bothered with those techie-stuff" -ness of the average Poser user.

As I said, the same happened once Firefly was introduced, and it took me pretty much a decade until I came up with a Firefly set-up that was satisfying and easy to handle to me.

But, still good luck to anyone trying to figure this thing out.

Once the Supafly preview looks as nice as my Firefly one does, once the graininess is gone without the help of a photoshop filter, once the render speed is still significantly faster, I'm happy to join "Team Supafly" myself.

But I have a feeling it'll take some more implementations of Poser until this happens.

BTW, isnt' it so that Supafly can't do "actual" (micro) displacement without a gazillion of iterations of subdivisions, anyway?

So what are we talking about here: "Just" bump or real displacement?

And if real displacement, how high is the mesh density necessary to achieve that?