Syle Devin Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I am trying to upload a mesh with a custom physics weight. In the uploader the physics weight shows .600. When I rez the mesh inworld and set the physics shape to prim the land impact jumps to 77. I have no idea what is happening or why the uploader is showing such different numbers. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arton Rotaru Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 That's because of the Importer shows only the Physics Weight of the Convex Hull shape type. Depending on the complexity of the physics mesh, it can be much more expensive under Physics Shape Type: Prim. Sadly, the only way to check this out is after the mesh has been uploaded, and set to type prim in-world. I think Drongle has filed a Feature Request on the Jira, to show the weight of both types in the importer already, but that was some years ago actually. So I wouldn't place a bet on that to be implemented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drongle McMahon Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 The uploader only shows the physics weight of the default convex hull, That shape is always made, whether you make another shape or not. It is used when the physics shape type is set to convex hull, which it is when you first rez the mesh. Showing the Prim type weight in the uploader has been requested in the jira since years ago. I don't know why they don't implement it. The data has to be temporarily uploaded anyway to get the other weights. Unfortunately this means you can't see the prim-type weight until you upload and rez, and it can often be a shock. This is one of the good reasons for always testing your mesh on the beta grid before spending L$ uploading on the main grid. As far as the actual physics weight is concerned, there are a lot of threads discussing this subject. We would need to know some details about how you made the shape, what were the physics upload parameters (especially whether analyzed or not), how big the mesh is and what you need the physics shape to do, before being able to offer specific advice on optimising it. ETA: Ha ha - snap! Arton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arton Rotaru Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Drongle McMahon wrote: ETA: Ha ha - snap! Arton. :matte-motes-smitten: Since you have answered this question so many times already, I thought I take over this time.:matte-motes-sunglasses-1: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now