I now consider Height maps to be a big downgrade

This so to say "transparency" (more obvious when strokes are overlapped and at the edges of paint) is an indication a paint doesn't interact well with textures anymore in Reb7. EVEN when height maps are turned off.

Also, you can notice there are no visible peaks and valleys in the last example in Reb 7. Those "echoes" of peaks and valleys look flat when in the example in Reb6 they are visible to the naked eye and prominent, I'm sorry but something is seriously wrong with Reb7 engine. I asked a couple of my friends and they all say Reb7 actually looks like digital media now. :0 

So I guess problem is originated not really in Height maps, because everything looks flat even with HM turned off in Reb7. R7 Height maps just make all textures look even more flat. 

+ nanopixel is still broken. 

If deva can fix all this - great. If no - I'll stick with Reb6. I'm sure some people will appreciate Reb7, it's just not my cup of tea.

Some overlapping strokes example. Which looks realistic to you? Definitely Reb6, Reb7 feels digital now. 

As I use mostly oils and acrylics, I was unaware of this.  But you are right and your examples clearly demonstrate what you are saying.  I agree the pencil strokes in Rebelle 6 look far more realistic.

michaelws, thanks for taking your time to write a commen,  oils and acrylics also have a lot of problems, unfortunately. 

Its less obvious because a solid thick paint interacts with textures differently but I'll  make comparisons of Oils in Reb6 and 7 when I have time. 

Because it's not the medium problem, but a nanopixel/texture engine/height maps problem, I think. 

It's very hard to describe but it feels like a texture is like a transparent thin layer applied   on top of our strokes, instead strokes INFLUENCING the texture.  :0

I can  basically recreate a similar to Reb 7 texture effect in Procreate now. Like is shown here: https://youtube.com/shorts/7YrUw76IVdY?si=WAyAYM4BI8G-tQXL

(they also have an option in Procreate to import paper texture).

On the other hand, Reb 6 texture and paint interaction was and is still SO good nothing stands close to that experience.  

Strokes have no weight anymore in Reb7, they are transparent and hardly affect a texture at all, especially when Height maps are ON. I just don't see a difference in results anymore when I change textures.  All looks flat. 

People on forum talked about texture looking "transparent" and having no weight, I didn't  get what were they talking about. I get it now.

Until recently I  was drawing in Reb7 and everything looked just wrong until I jumped back in Reb6, suddenly my style was back. I could feel the weight of the paint again and the most important - had fun again while drawing. 

just curious on the brushes that were used to paint these example strokes, is smudge on ? is smudge on paper bumps on ? and what is the smudge density set to ? these could all effect the look of the strokes with and without heightmaps on. i dont disagree im just curious of the settings used and if turning these off or on looks different to you. 

cheriekitten, yep I made sure to turn off all smudging fucntions, both brushes have same shape and blank (white sheet) grain.

Personally I'm not yet decided what to make out of the Heightmap thing. While I prefer the "old look" for some brushes, I can also see (and quite like) the potential of HM in conjunction with the new additions like background textures and dual brush or the new settings for 'Smudge on Paper Bumps'.

Here's a comparison from a different angle - a single dab that has various opacity levels:

• 1st column is done in Rebelle 6, 2nd is Rebelle 7 with Heightmap off, 3rd with HM on
• tried to match the appearance from R6 as much as possible by adjusting Loading from 100 to 70 in the 2nd column, and Paper Texture Strength in the 3rd column (HM on) in R7 - for other brushes those adjustments may vary
• without adjustments the differences were quite drastic!
• all brush parameters are static to avoid pressure influence or randomness
• all dabs were done in the same position and then transformed
• Paper and Paint Texture at 0 to avoid influence of paint- and paper texture mismatch - paper is Hemp Smooth

First off, without adjustments the differences were quite drastic! The appearance (after adjustment) without HM is similar in R7, but definitely not the same (though in some parts I like the R7 version better). With HM on, I'd say that micro texture is more pronounced, whereas large scale variations are lost. Without HM there's a kind of a 3D-ish look, whereas with HM it looks much more uniform and lacks depth - much of the beauty of the paper down the drain, esp. with mid to high Strength settings.

Also, with HM on, paper texture influence is lower at low settings and higher at high settings, as can be seen from the adjusted values in the 3rd column above. So with normal brushes, where 'Paper Texture Strength' depends on pressure, this wider influence range can lead to a very different feel.

I've also made tests with regular brushes... ya know the ones with which one actually paints. However, because pressure influence, randomness etc. play an important role in how the brushes feel, it's very difficult to make objective comparisons here. But overall I'd say that using the exact same brush, there are indeed significant differences between R6 and R7 (HM off). In R7 the brushes feel more "smeary" to me, for lack of a better word. It takes a lot of effort to even come close to the behaviour in R6, which for those of us who have spent significant amounts of time creating their own brushes, is a bit of a letdown (we've been through this from R5 to R6 already, haven't we?).

Seeing how much adjustment brushes need to work in R7 as they used to in R6 (or at least close to it), I repeat my suggestion to add a HM toggle per preset in the brush creator. That should give us the best of both worlds.