Hi I’m trying to do a basic landscape that’s using colours for grass and dirt. But when painting these colours they come out very pixelated on the edges and don’t look smooth. Any ideas on what I need to do to fix this?
Hello there @Mapesy!
Checking your footage that covers your setup, I think the main issue is right here:
Your landscape resolution is quite low, with only 57 vertices across the area, the paint mask has very little room to work with, and that will give the blocky/pixel look you are seeing. As a quick test, re-create the landscape, with a way higher resolution, around 250, 500, or 1000, and try painting the same grass transition.
Also, check your landscape material, as the “Landscape Layer Blend” node is currently set to “Weight Blend”. I would test with “Alpha Blend” instead.
For further experiments, it always helps to review UE’s docs on the matter:
You got some real genious replies here! 
1 meter (or unreal unit) is 1 meter. Adding more size/components of the same won’t magically change how they look.
Layer blending isn’t for a “less pixellating” look. It addresses how the shader constructs and affects which layer is the backing.
So, this is the landscape.
You can’t change it.
If you choose to use it you need to work around it.
One way to mask the effect is to make your base textures actually be something similar to each other. One painted on the other will no longer result in visible pixels but closer to an amalgamum of sorts.
Another way is to just blend in a 3rd texture on the alpha zones; whenever the material isn’t at full alpha, an underlying texture is used to handle the transition between colors. Because that textures has a shape (imagine a cloud in 256x256 from the old photoshop filter), the high and lows of the transition area aren’t discernable as a blotchy pixels grid. This texture would be WPO placed and the same for the other layers to blend into to.
The other way is to just shove decals on the transition zone to hide it.
Try increasing the landscape resolution and checking the brush falloff/filtering settings. Low landscape or texture resolution is usually what causes those pixelated edges.
What do you need the landscape to do? How big of a thing are you going to ultimately run with?
There are various numbers you can play with insofar as the component and vertex resolution. Just as an example, after playing around with various configurations, I’ve settled on this for a (just-about) 4k² landscape (optimal memory/performance based on testing):
I found once I was above 256 components performance started to go dowhill quickly.
As for the jaggies, you reeeeeeally don’t want to paint a lot of your landscape layers: use maths (automaterials) to drive a lot of what you want, capture the alpha, export to a texture, and then use those baked-maths (that’s what a texture really is a bake-point, time for space) as the alpha. You can add painters into the mix if you want, use maths to refine what you paint as well.
You could also consider the use of Runtime Virtual Textures (RVTs) in-lieu of a baked-texture. In some cases, they seem to offer better performance bang/buck vs a static (virtual) texture. As well, since the RVT is a shader-sink vs it can be pixel-perfect in a way even a 16k or 32k texture can’t be on that 4k(ish) landscape.
Use the editor as an editing program and then make sure you bake all your alphas, textures, etc. You’ll then have to slightly-rework your landscape material to account for new inputs, but if done right, IMHO, every landscape material should have an edit-path, then you bake as much as you can, and then a (faster) production-path where all that frozen-math can be skipped..
Otherwise if you are using the RVT-path, you keep the same maths and just feed it into the RVT. Bake what you can, but given the noted advantages, you likely won’t want to.
In other words, don’t use just the basic-paintbrush, you will have to add something on top of that to get anything better than what a painted layer will give you. Like, always…