Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Phil Deakins

Avatar sizes

204 posts in this topic


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

Can i have the one in the silks? pretty please?

Aw, could be spoken for already... :smileysad:

... or she might prefer to stay single and free ... perhaps?  :smileywink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Coby Foden wrote:


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

Can i have the one in the silks? pretty please?

Aw, could be spoken for already... :smileysad:

... or she might prefer to stay single and free ... perhaps?  :smileywink:

I didn't mean permenantly, just for a few hours...:matte-motes-big-grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Reikokimyo wrote:

I think people are reading into Pussycat's post wrong.  She can correct me if I'm wrong.  I think shes talking about the fact that you cannot make a proportional avi correctly if youre over a certain (average?) height.  I don't think she is railing against people that honestly want to make the avi they way they do, with intentionally different proportions.

Yep.

The thing you'll learn in art school too is that if you want to distort -EFFECTIVELY- (to trigger a certain mood in yourself or your viewer) you need to first understand how to do it without distortion, so you can then learn what to distort and how for any given effect.

If you look at some really top notch 'stylized animation' - those artists have a consistency to how they distort, one that creates a powerful mood in the visual.

Shooting in the dark though - not knowing where you are going or how, will always deliver a weaker message / weaker visual.

And I don't believe that most people want to be distorted. They just don't know how to be proportional - while proportions are pretty simple, they are not easy. And the SL dials work against us in reaching them...

 

Oh and the other day I found someone who's been posting proportion guides even longer than Penny or I. Going to link that person to my blog. I'd link it here, but last time I did that the mods got jumpy... seems in the no advertising policy, only advertisements can be linked here. Articles, which are ok by the policy, will be deleted... o.O

 

Lastly while I have a to scale avatar, I am -NOT- arguing scale, but proportion. Related, but not identical. Some others are arguing scale and proportion, or just scale, or like me just proportion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

I also have a long torso, and my legs are also quite a bit longer than your perfect proportions suggest they should be.  To say this came about due only to " a birth defect or tragic accident or malnutrition" is absurd. A long torso is common enough that they even make bathing suits to fit them widely available.  My long legs run in the genes of my family.  I have a niece that has much more proportionally longer legs than I and no one calls her a freak;  quite the contrary, most people find her gorgeous.

You just defeated your own point. You have a long torso and long legs.

Take a tape measure to yourself. Where is your midpoint?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you make a good point about scale. is ok to scale up or down as you like

i quite like petites. i also quite like the giant lady that someone made the same way. she stands about 200m tall. and can move same way as avatar and petite. and is total proportion. like is not a freak. just a really big big lady (:

is amazing to see. i would like to get one of them one day if/when they start to sell them and can get outfits. be really cool

+

if look at the lady in red on the pic that Coby made. that lady wants to be big. and is ok that. but the avatar shape editor dont let her be the way she wants really i dont think

would be really good if linden fix the shape editor. or even made a better one like they got in Eve Online

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Pussycat Catnap wrote:


Reikokimyo wrote:

I think people are reading into Pussycat's post wrong.  She can correct me if I'm wrong.  I think shes talking about the fact that you cannot make a proportional avi correctly if youre over a certain (average?) height.  I don't think she is railing against people that honestly want to make the avi they way they do, with intentionally different proportions.

Yep.

The thing you'll learn in art school too is that if you want to distort -EFFECTIVELY- (to trigger a certain mood in yourself or your viewer) you need to first understand how to do it without distortion, so you can then learn what to distort and how for any given effect.

If you look at some really top notch 'stylized animation' - those artists have a consistency to how they distort, one that creates a powerful mood in the visual.

Shooting in the dark though - not knowing where you are going or how, will always deliver a weaker message / weaker visual.

And I don't believe that most people want to be distorted. They just don't know how to be proportional - while proportions are pretty simple, they are not easy. And the SL dials work against us in reaching them...

 

Oh and the other day I found someone who's been posting proportion guides even longer than Penny or I. Going to link that person to my blog. I'd link it here, but last time I did that the mods got jumpy... seems in the no advertising policy, only advertisements can be linked here. Articles, which are ok by the policy, will be deleted...
o.O

 

Lastly while I have a to scale avatar, I am -NOT- arguing scale, but proportion. Related, but not identical. Some others are arguing scale and proportion, or just scale, or like me just proportion.

 

I think people forget that scale and proportion are different things.  I got your proportion thing yesterday, and am now proportionate, but my scale is smaller than most.

Speaking of getting proper proportions, how do you do so with an avi taller than 1.5m tall?  I currently stand that height (according to LL's measurement in edit shape window) and my arm lenth slider is at max, but my arms come just shy of your measuring object (by about 10cm).  I can't see it being possible to do with an avi any taller (I usually try and stay shorter than norma).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reikokimyo wrote:

Speaking of getting proper proportions, how do you do so with an avi taller than 1.5m tall?  I currently stand that height (according to LL's measurement in edit shape window) and my arm lenth slider is at max, but my arms come just shy of your measuring object (by about 10cm).  I can't see it being possible to do with an avi any taller (I usually try and stay shorter than norma).

Linden Lab viewer's edit shape window does not show the right avatar height.  It shows what is called "Agent Height", and this avatar's agent height is shorter than the avatar.

You should measure yourself with a prim to get the real height of your avatar.  Some viewers show pretty close the same height for avatar as measured by prim (for example: Firestorm,  Phoenix).

Then there are scripted height measuring objects.  Unfortunately many of them show the "Agent Height" not the real avatar height.  There are also HUDs for measuring avatar height.

So the only exactly accurate way to measure avatar height is doing it by prim.  Streching the prim from the sole of the feet up to the top of the skull (without hair, without shoes and shoe shapers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Coby Foden wrote:


Reikokimyo wrote:

Speaking of getting proper proportions, how do you do so with an avi taller than 1.5m tall?  I currently stand that height (according to LL's measurement in edit shape window) and my arm lenth slider is at max, but my arms come just shy of your measuring object (by about 10cm).  I can't see it being possible to do with an avi any taller (I usually try and stay shorter than norma).

Linden Lab viewer's edit shape window does not show the right avatar height.  It shows what is called "Agent Height", and this avatar's
agent height is shorter than the avatar
.

You should measure yourself with a prim to get the real height of your avatar.  Some viewers show pretty close the same height for avatar as measured by prim (for example: Firestorm,  Phoenix).

Then there are scripted height measuring objects.  Unfortunately many of them show the "Agent Height" not the real avatar height.  There are also HUDs for measuring avatar height.

So the only exactly accurate way to measure avatar height is doing it by prim.  Streching the prim from the sole of the feet up to the top of the skull (without hair, without shoes and shoe shapers).

After messing about with shape.  I am 1.5m tall now.  Seems its hard to get an easy height measurement outside of rezzing a prim and measuring yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After messing about with shape.  I am 1.5m tall now.  Seems its hard to get an easy height measurement outside of rezzing a prim and measuring yourself. 

In the end, this is the only real way to find out how tall your avatar is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Jo Yardley wrote:


After messing about with shape.  I am 1.5m tall now.  Seems its hard to get an easy height measurement outside of rezzing a prim and measuring yourself. 

In the end, this is the only real way to find out how tall your avatar is.

 

That sucks.  It would be nice to have a fast way to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Markeplace search for "shape tools".  You will get a box with some useful tools for shape adjusting.
There is even height HUD included, which gives very close the right height.

(Shape Tools is free.):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Coby Foden wrote:

In the Markeplace search for
"shape tools"
.  You will get a box with some useful tools for shape adjusting.

There is even height HUD included, which gives very close the right height.

 

(Shape Tools is free.):

Thank you.  Found it.  It seems to be pretty accurate to what I measured with a prim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i see some guys compensating for having a tiny ferrari..

walkin round with these big ole wangers!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Jo Yardley wrote:


Phil Deakins wrote:

The Berlin sim was mentioned a number of times and I went there during the old thread, but all I found were large spaces - no typical RL-sized rooms. I think that was because I had to be in a group or renting or something. Even so, I have yet to see a typical RL-sized room that works acceptably well within the SL world. I'm thinking of a furnished 12' x 12' x 8' room.

Did you visit the right Berlin?
;)

And here is another room, I made it for a public display at the SL's birthday exhibit, so the ceiling is a little higher to allow people in.

But scale wise, it is smaller then my livingroom in RL. 

Yes I visited the right Berlin. In fact I talked about the train and stuff there :)

The picture you posted does look like a typical RL sized living room, which I assume it is, and it makes my point for me; i.e. navigating around the furniture inside that room, with the conditions in the SL world, would be very awkward compared to navigating around a furnished room that is created according to the SL conditions. The camera can be set wherever you like, and moving can be done with whatever method you choose, but navigating in that room will always be much worse than navigating in room that's been creating according to the conditions in the SL world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Coby. I'm back.

You are probably right - we should agree to differ - but it won't stop me from posting my views on the subject though ;) And to reiterate my views on the subject...

(1) Other than personal choice, there is no need whatsoever for SL sizes to match RL sizes. This is because RL and SL are two completely different worlds, and sizes have evolved in each of them according the the conditions in each of them. In the SL world, the camera is the cause of the way that sizes evolved, and the resulting sizes suit the SL world.

(2) If the SL meter is assumed to be not the same as the RL meter, then the idea of matching SL sizes to actual RL sizes doesn't come up. If an apparent match is wanted, it's only necessary to create so that things look the same.

Both of those completely do away with the very idea of SL sizes matching RL sizes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

 

Yes I visited the right Berlin. In fact I talked about the train and stuff there 
:)

The picture you posted does look like a typical RL sized living room, which I assume it is, and it makes my point for me; i.e. navigating around the furniture inside that room, with the conditions in the SL world, would be
very
awkward compared to navigating around a furnished room that is created according to the SL conditions. The camera can be set wherever you like, and moving can be done with whatever method you choose, but navigating in that room will always be much worse than navigating in room that's been creating according to the conditions in the SL world.


Was just double checking because we now also have a big shopping street next to the teleport area and some people never find the train ;)

But yes, the rl scale takes some getting used to, but with a RL scale avatar and with my camera at almost eye height and some practise, it is now a piece of cake.

As all our apartments have been rented pretty much all of the time, it seems that the people in Berlin get used to it as well.

And another fun side of RL scale is that when they move up in the world and leave a small room to go live in a nice house, they actually feel like they suddenly have a lot of space, even though the biggest houses in Berlin are usually smaller then most livingrooms elsewhere in SL ;)

I even experience big spaces as big spaces, it is quite an interesting experience to leave my small apartment and actually feel outside when I can suddely look around more hehehehe.

Changing your camera position helps a lot, but even with just zooming in most of the time, it won't be much of an issue.

Here is a picture with the normal camera setting and my changed camera settings in a home where the ceiling is 3 meters high;

6884720742_3cfdd74b53.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Pussycat Catnap wrote:


Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

I also have a long torso, and my legs are also quite a bit longer than your perfect proportions suggest they should be.  To say this came about due only to " a birth defect or tragic accident or malnutrition" is absurd. A long torso is common enough that they even make bathing suits to fit them widely available.  My long legs run in the genes of my family.  I have a niece that has much more proportionally longer legs than I and no one calls her a freak;  quite the contrary, most people find her gorgeous.

You just defeated your own point. You have a long torso and long legs.

Take a tape measure to yourself. Where is your midpoint?

 

Actually no.  The distance from my feet to the 'perfect' proportion midpoint is longer than from the top of my head to the same point. 

A long torso only means that my torso is longer than average for the size that I wear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Amethyst Jetaime wrote:


Pussycat Catnap wrote:


Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

I also have a long torso, and my legs are also quite a bit longer than your perfect proportions suggest they should be.  To say this came about due only to " a birth defect or tragic accident or malnutrition" is absurd. A long torso is common enough that they even make bathing suits to fit them widely available.  My long legs run in the genes of my family.  I have a niece that has much more proportionally longer legs than I and no one calls her a freak;  quite the contrary, most people find her gorgeous.

You just defeated your own point. You have a long torso and long legs.

Take a tape measure to yourself. Where is your midpoint?

 

Actually no.  The distance from my feet to the 'perfect' proportion midpoint is longer than from the top of my head to the same point. 

A long torso only means that my torso is longer than average for the size that I wear.

I'm not getting into the human proportions discussion except that I have to agree with you on your point. Yesterday, I was watching TV with a friend when a young woman came on who had a surpisingly long lower torso (between her waist and her 'beam') compared to the rest of her body. It was so out of the ordinary that we both noticed it. If that shape was replicated in SL, it would be seen as being 'wrong' and as needing adjustment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

(1) Other than personal choice, there is no need whatsoever for SL sizes to match RL sizes. This is because RL and SL are two completely different worlds, and sizes have evolved in each of them according the the conditions in each of them. In the SL world, the camera is the cause of the way that sizes evolved, and the resulting sizes suit the SL world.

.

yes there is a need. a technical one

Coby mention that tools like blender, autocad, daz etc all use the RL meter same as SL. when you make stuff in them then they all import and export with the same dimensions to avoid distorting the models

if SL used a different measure then would be problems. someone would have to write a special SL convertor if the models created by them were to be uploaded into SL. and with such a convertor is virtual impossible to avoid distortion for all shapes/models when doing this. bc when go from large to small then is lossy. when go from small to large then have to do approximate tesselation

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is that, of course, but it's not an actual need to match SL sizes with RL sizes. I.e. to create rooms and furniture to RL sizes. It's easy enough to decide the SL size of something, in meters, and then create it in another programme, so there's no need at all to replicate actual RL sizes in SL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

@Coby. I'm back.

Woot! desismileys_3992.gif    :matte-motes-big-grin: :matte-motes-wink:


Phil Deakins wrote:

 

(2) If the SL meter is assumed to be
not
the same as the RL meter, then the idea of matching SL sizes to actual RL sizes doesn't come up. If an apparent match is wanted, it's only necessary to create so that things look the same.

Both of those completely do away with the very idea of SL sizes matching RL sizes.

Blurps - a perfect world?  Ermm.gif

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

There is that, of course, but it's not an actual need to match SL sizes with RL sizes. I.e. to create rooms and furniture to RL sizes. It's easy enough to decide the SL size of something, in meters, and then create it in another programme, so there's no need at all to replicate actual RL sizes in SL.

yes can make a model to any scale. even in RL. 1:1, 1:10, 1:100, etc

just makes it easier when the 1 is some recognised standard unit of measure. say like if designing/modelling a building in autocad then be a bit difficult for the builder if it wasnt. and bc programs like autocad do this then every other program ever after incl SL do the same way

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it makes it easier to create 1:1 in an external programme, but it makes it harder to actually use in SL ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

Yes it makes it easier to create 1:1 in an external programme, but it makes it harder to actually use in SL
;)

jejejejejje (:

be quite hard in RL as well i think. if you had 2 telescopes stuck the wrong way round on your eyes (:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0