Jump to content

Saving Prims Challenge - Max Forward Facing Square faces on a single prim


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 4365 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

So I have a project that requires displaying lots of textures.   I am trying to cut down on the number of prims by flattening and torquing standard prims.     My challenge question for the SL Power Builders is:

===>   What is the maxinum number of forward-facing, equal sized square faces that can be on a single prim???  And of course how do you build it?   (faces down have to be really flat just appear that way).

 

 I know that you can easily get 2 Forward facing square face by smushing down a Prism.

Then if you path cut a prism you can get 2 faces on each end for a total of 4 face (you really have to fiddle with the angles and cut to get the square faces, the the texturing is not a 1 to 1 either.

Finally you can get 5 faces on that same prism that has been cut on both ends by hollowing it out with a sqare hallow shape about 30 per cent.

...............................................

So Experts, are ther any more possibilities of producing  more square faces with a standard prim?

Can sculpties or mesh objects be used to do more - If so how, or where do I obtain the object?

Many thanks

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Malestorm wrote:

Could you describe the process ? 

In any 3D modeling program, do the following:

1.  Create a plane with 8 divisions.

2.  Assign a unique material to each quad.

3.  Export to COLLADA (.dae) format.

4.  Upload to SL, and assign a unique texture to each quad.

If this takes you 60 seconds, you're doing it slowly.  That's assuming you know how to use a 3D modeling program, of coruse.

 


Malestorm wrote:

And could you double it or even make a 10 by 10 grid of 2 mm squares?

I'm not sure what you mean by "10 by 10 grid of 2 mm squares".  Did you mean ten squares by ten squares or  ten meters by ten meters? 

If it's the latter, that would give you 500 squares per side, for a grand total of 2500, which would be an absolutely insane amount of texture data.  The former would be 100 textures, still a bit much, but obviously nowhere near as bad as 2500.  Either way, 2 millimeters is awfully tiny to warrant an entire texture.  Do you really expect people to zoom in so close that they'd see the full resolution of even a fairly small texture, on such a tiny surface?

In any case, a single mesh object can have up to eight materials on it, no more.  If you want more than that, you'll have to use additional objects.

Another option would be to panel your textures together in Photoshop beforehand, so you can create the appearance of more images, with less individual surfaces required.  If your images are each 256x256, for example then you can put 16 of them on a single 1024x1024 canvas.  Eight such textures would give you the appearance of 128 images, all on just a single plane.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to all the people who have added to my knowledge on this subject.

I found a couple of flat mesh planes on marketplace that are exactly what Drongle was describing.   Some in an 8 x 1 side configuration and some in a 4 x 2.      These are free are little cost.

There is a hard limit of 8 materials on any mesh object, so if you want more than that you can always link together several of the mesh panes.   So for example you could link together 8 of the 8 x 1 planes to get an 8 x 8 configuration using the equivalent of 4 prims (as each ofthe mesh plans is only .5).

As to the question of face size, it seems to me that if you want you can make a plane in your favorite mesh creation tool with any combination of sizes of faces... as long as you do not exceed 8 materials in a memsh object.

This discussion has really helped me and I thank all who contributed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

"...

 If your images are each
2456
x256, 

..."

------------------------------

Typo? 
:)

Sorry, Chosen...........I couldn't resist.  But you know me.  I'm just built that way.  :heart:

 

Good eye. Peggy.  Thanks for the heads up.  Typo, corrected. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see your activity once again in the SL forums. 

I know the reasons you slowed your contributions, but I wanted to tell you that I really like to see your posts once again.  Even if it's only occasionally.  Maybe we can fight again!! 

*I'm joking and you know it.......we have gotten way past those days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcome back, Peggy.   And yeah, we're way past those old days, happily. :)

I'm curious about the "reasons" of which you spoke..  Are there rumors floating around or something?  Heh, I didn't know I was on people's minds that much.  Curious as I am, it's probably best not to discuss such things here, so I'm content to live with the mystery.  Something tells me I might not want to know, anyway. ;)

The fact of the matter is far more boring  than whatever stories anybody might have assumed, I'm sure.  I was very ill for about a month.  During that time, I was barely awake enough to do much of anything at all, let alone post on the forums with any regularity.  Since recovering from that illness, I've been extremely busy, scrambling to catch up on the backlog of unfinished work that accumulated while I was out of it for so long.  So yeah, no alien abductions, no tomb raiding adventures, no clever Linden conspiracies, or anything else exciting like that.  Just plain old sickness and work.

Heads up, in case anyone's interested, you can expect another absence for most of July.  I'll be working on a feature film, and will need to be on set 12+ hours per day, on top of everything else.  It's unlikely I'll have time for little things like breathing and blinking my eyes, let alone posting on the forums.  Oh, there was a time when it would just magically all fit in, but I'm afraid I'm not as young as I used to be. :)

 

Anyway, there are far more important things to discuss than lil' ol' me, and I don't want to hijack the thread, so I'll leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh there was no discussion about your absence that I know of..........I just remember I haven't seen many posts from you in about a year and a half (I few about mesh is all).  I do remember you not being overly excited about how the forums evolved into this modified blog mess trying to mimick a forum so I just assumed you moved to a forum much easier to navigate and discus things.

But I saw your post and chuckled when I saw your typo.  I just had tease the professor over it.  Glad you got your health back in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, that's what you meant.  Yeah, like most, I wasn't pleased back when they first switched over to the new forum software.  It was underdeveloped at that point, very lacking in functionality.  As I recall, it took me a couple weeks or so after the switch to work up any enthusiasm toward using it at all.  It's gotten considerably better since then, though.  I actually really like the way it works now (recent login issues notwithstanding).

In any case, I've been around, although evidently only about 1/4 as much as you have.  My 1295 posts bow to your 5247! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 4365 days.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...