# Second Life is too expensive!

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

## Recommended Posts

16 wrote:

if default camera is set to 60deg which it roughly is then when flatten it to 75 deg then the distance to the midpoint where it bisect the ground is twice as far away from the avatar

the black lines show where the default camera is (assume 60). the blue lines show 75 about

can choose different starting angles. say 66 instead of 60. then the bisect = 33. if flatten by half then is still twice as far. if flatten by a quarter then is 1.5 as far. and so on

the greatest number of boxes and first build prims are rezzed closer to the bisect point than any other regardless of angle

+

other thing is the bisect point at 60 deg is approx. half way between the bottom of the screen and the inworld horizon

when flatten the camera angle say to 75 then the horizon is lowered by the same factor. which when translate to the 2D plane of the screen reduces the height of the mouse picking area. while simultaneous increasing the distance/depth of the pickable area

the diagram shows this as well

+

like the other thing i am chattin about. is math this. in this case is geometry

when have to pick a default then pick the one that fits best overall with the geometry of the view

way back when linden first made SL somebody put a lot of thought into this

Where's the avatar in your diagram? It's not just a question of camera angle; the default camera position is important, too. Here's me and a prim I've just rezzed, at my default camera angle and position.   I don't have a Linden Home, but the second picture was taken in a small room in my house. The second picture is cropped, which is why it looks as if I'm nearer. The first one is full screen.

• Replies 204
• Created

#### Posted Images

the green line is the avatar

the redlines are about where the camera is at say 75 deg when move camera to where can see the feet of the avatar

if move the vertical redline to the same position as the black vertical line then the red bisect line will be in the same position as the blue bisect line

for this to happen then have to move the green avatar line to the left by the same amount. which also move the left blue further to the left again by the same amount

or can move red vertical line to the green line and not move the green line. which is what happens when the camera pops when is a wall behind

+

I just add something else bc is important to answer the question. why did linden pick this camera position? and not a flatter one

10 years ago. screen resolution was 800x600. 640x480 on consumer computer. the number of pixels available to form the picking area was half what it is now. less even

##### Share on other sites

All I can say is that I use the following settings, based on this article in Ciaran Laval's blog about Penny's settings.    My settings aren't the same as those recommended by Penny (or Ciaran); they're based on them, but modified to suit my preferences, screen resolution, eyesight and so on.

I find them perfectly convenient for building with.   My avatar, including the monstrously high heels she normally wears, is a tad under 6 feet tall (that is, comes up to somewhere just above waist-height on half the men she meets in SL, particularly the newer accounts).

##### Share on other sites

I understand experientially what 16 is talking about.  I do use revised Camera settings, close to Penny's sugestion but tweaked to my personal preference.

If my memory serves me correctly, there is a function called 'cast-ray' that comes into play when rezzing an object.  It's not uncommon for me to have to 'wiggle my mouse around' a bit to get it to hit the ground so I can rez an object.

##### Share on other sites

me and Penny got into this bc I take exception to her often repeated claim that linden are just a bunch of engineers who don't know nothing

is total disrespect this claim to everyone who ever worked for linden the company. is total disrespect to people like Torley and Michael Linden. is total disrespect for the resident Moles. is total disrespect for the residents whose names are written on the wall at Plum. the ones who sweated blood and pixels in the beta for us to make this world for us to have

yes things could be better. they could always better newer brighter shinier. less lag. more this. more that. fix this. fix that. fix it all

can chat about all these and dream and wish as well. but is no need for Penny to be disrespectful to all these people who we all owe so much to

+

am not saying that you Innula are disrespectful bc you not

i just went thru the diagrams and that just to show why we got the default camera position we have. that when it was decided way back when the lindens who did decide this did know what they were doing

##### Share on other sites

when linden change the picking to raycasting I had a linden home. they linden messed it up on the first go. I lost 8 meters of rez space off my home. a quarter of the parcel. I was lucky bc I was close to the center of the sim. the neighbours further out lost half. the ones on the edge lost it all

was like that  for ages until they sort it out. is still buggy in some instances the raycast. like just says cant rez. but can just move the camera. zoom in to the ground a bit the easiest way. but lol at that time we on my home sim we was rezzing stuff on our feet with the camera point straight down

##### Share on other sites

16 wrote:

when linden change the picking to raycasting I had a linden home. they linden messed it up on the first go. I lost 8 meters of rez space off my home. a quarter of the parcel. I was lucky bc I was close to the center of the sim. the neighbours further out lost half. the ones on the edge lost it all

was like that  for ages until they sort it out. is still buggy in some instances the raycast. like just says cant rez. but can just move the camera. zoom in to the ground a bit the easiest way. but lol at that time we on my home sim we was rezzing stuff on our feet with the camera point straight down

i remember quite well when castray was all messed up.

my point though in my post was that it seems like changing the camera view seems to change my 'aim' a little.

##### Share on other sites

It would be really cool if there were some four or five different default views instead of the present two (the default  and the mouse look).

For example:

1. Mouse look
2. Real first person view
3. Building/rezzing view
4. Additional view (lower view for walking)
5. Additional view (another lower view for walking)

All these views should be selectable with:
Keyboard shortcuts and/or buttons.

And naturally all those default views should be user configurable like the present default view is.

In the present default view - without adjusting - the camera is way too high (for anything else than for newbies rezzing stuff perhaps) which leads to the common trend of making the rooms very tall; to avoid hitting the camera on the ceiling.  And it leads also to distorted view of the avatar.  People may think that their avatar is short due to this default view (I tend to call it "view from a tree top" :smileywink:).  And thus they follow the so common practice of making their avatars very tall, so that they would look "normal" when looked from the top of a tree.

##### Share on other sites

SLV

SLV

Firestorm

Coby Foden wrote:

It would be really cool if there were some
four or five different default views
instead of the present two (the default  and the mouse look).

For example:

1. Mouse look

2. Real first person view

3. Building/rezzing view

4. Additional view (lower view for walking)

5. Additional view (another lower view for walking)

All these views should be selectable with:

Keyboard shortcuts and/or buttons.

And naturally all those default views should be user configurable like the present default view is.

In the present default view - without adjusting - the camera is way too high
(for anything else than for newbies rezzing stuff perhaps)
which leads to the common trend of making the rooms very tall; to avoid hitting the camera on the ceiling.  And it leads also to distorted view of the avatar.  People may think that their avatar is short due to this default view
(I tend to call it "view from a tree top" :smileywink:)
.  And thus they follow the so common practice of making their avatars very tall, so that they would look "normal" when looked from the top of a tree.

I love how Firestorm puts on one resizeable window what it takes the Official Viewer three (IMHO oversized) windows to accomplish.

It would be great if there was a way to add custom presets to this.

However, not being a coder, I have no idea the what the level of difficulty to do this would be.

##### Share on other sites

I think this may be the window to which Coby refers, accessable in Firestorm from World>Photo and Video>Cameratools (Ctrl Shift C).

##### Share on other sites

Coby Foden wrote:

It would be really cool if there were some
four or five different default views
instead of the present two (the default  and the mouse look).

For example:

1. Mouse look

2. Real first person view

3. Building/rezzing view

4. Additional view (lower view for walking)

5. Additional view (another lower view for walking)

All these views should be selectable with:

Keyboard shortcuts and/or buttons.

(Bolding mine)

YES, YES, YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Especially #2 - I've been complaining about this from my first day on SL.)

##### Share on other sites

Innula Zenovka wrote:

I think this may be the window to which Coby refers, accessable in Firestorm from World>Photo and Video>Cameratools (Ctrl Shift C).

Umm.. no.  I never use those camera view control widgets in any viewer.

What I mean that instead of one default view (the view down from a tree top) plus mouselook view, there should be additional default views (from different heights and distances from the avatar.  Then one could switch between those different views simply by pressing a shortcut key on the keyboard.  Just like the way the multiple "default" views are in almost any game.  For some (strange) reason no Second Life viewer has not implemented many different easily switcable views.

##### Share on other sites

In that case, I share Perrie's puzzlement about what the "one resizeable window" is that Firestorm uses and the Official Viewer doesn't.

##### Share on other sites

Coby Foden wrote:

What I mean that instead of
one default view
(the view down from a tree top) plus mouselook view,
there should be additional default views
(from different heights and distances from the avatar.  Then one could switch between those different views simply by pressing a shortcut key on the keyboard.  Just like the way the multiple "default" views are in almost any game.  For some (strange) reason no Second Life viewer has not implemented many different easily switcable views.

that be pretty good that. is a good idea. custom views. maybe as well could have custom ribbon toolbars also

##### Share on other sites

Perrie Juran wrote:

my point though in my post was that it seems like changing the camera view seems to change my 'aim' a little.

yes. in the diagram can see about the bisect line. whats interesting is that's where we mostly pick regardless of our camera. can see this in Innulas photos.  the box is close to her feet in the room pic. which correspond to the bisect line of her camera shown by the redlines. the box is further away in the sandbox shot. bc her horizon is lower than in the room shot

is ok the redline camera position when is nothing behind you. when is something behind then blue lines. or move green avatar further away from the wall. which reduce the picking distance between the camera and the far boundary

this most problematic in Linden Homes which are small parcels and not regular sized rectangles. so if your camera is flatter then end up tilt the camera. zoom the camera closer to the floor. etc. then rez. or work out where you can stand without doing this. and where you cant and not do it there. so rez and then edit/move to where you want it

is plain old geometry that dictate these kinds of things. we do have choices and can make them for ourselves. the choices that we do have tho are bound by the math. is nothing we can do to change the bounds themselves. to change the bounds we have to change the math/formula/algo being applied

##### Share on other sites

Innula Zenovka wrote:

In that case, I share Perrie's puzzlement about what the "one resizeable window" is that Firestorm uses and the Official Viewer doesn't.

Which brings us to something that is probably more in your category of expertise.

Each of those choices points to (is a short cut to??) debug settings.  My guess is that you really can't have more than one set of debug settings per function.  You set your default view.  Everything you do with the camera controls afterward is a temporary over ride.  "Esc" returns you to the default settings you have chosen.  So to have more than one 'fixed' default Front View, Rear View, etc available at the click of a mouse so to speak would require a scripted object (HUD) that applied new settings to the debug menu.

I think I'm making sense here.  Can you change debug settings with a script?

##### Share on other sites

You can't change debug settings by script (apart from a couple with RLV but that's a special case).   You can, as you suggest, temporarily change camera settings by script, but that requires a hud (or you to sit on something) and, as you say, ESC will return you to the default.

I don't really see why a TPV couldn't give you some extra default settings, though.    However, I not sure how many I would use.. I usually drag my camera round manually, but I suppose different people have different ways of doing things.

##### Share on other sites

Innula Zenovka wrote:

You can't change debug settings by script (apart from a couple with RLV but that's a special case).   You can, as you suggest, temporarily change camera settings by script, but that requires a hud (or you to sit on something) and, as you say, ESC will return you to the default.

I don't really see why a TPV couldn't give you some extra default settings, though.    However, I not sure how many I would use.. I usually drag my camera round manually, but I suppose different people have different ways of doing things.

Actually I'd think it could become popular for people who use vehicles alot.  The view I want when I am riding a motorcycle or a horse is is different than the view I want when I am out walking around or clubbing.

##### Share on other sites

Perrie Juran wrote:

.

this be a really good place to put custom views. can add a Save As button to the bottom. right click to delete. and like Coby wants then can save the whole UI as well in the saved view

##### Share on other sites

16 wrote:

Perrie Juran wrote:

.

this be a really good place to put custom views. can add a Save As button to the bottom. right click to delete. and like Coby wants then can save the whole UI as well in the saved view

What would really jack my daw would be if LL added that functionality and still left the element un-resizeable.

##### Share on other sites

Perrie Juran wrote:

16 wrote:

Perrie Juran wrote:

.

this be a really good place to put custom views. can add a Save As button to the bottom. right click to delete. and like Coby wants then can save the whole UI as well in the saved view

What would really jack my daw would be if LL added that functionality and still left the element un-resizeable.

yes lol NoIdea Linden maybe strike again (:

+

i quite like the way the minimap is done. skinny dialog. no wasted space. i also like the way Firestorm makes dialogs skinny style. by trim the borders space and put the buttons in the window title/grab bar

if linden could make a skinny and fat UI option in Preferences then that be pretty good

i would defo choose the skinny option for myself. other people maybe would like the fat option. like people who cant see very well and need bigger buttons to see/find. and infirm people who need a bigger button area to click on

so if can have as a option then everybody happy

##### Share on other sites

• 2 weeks later...

Sorry to add to this topic a few days after it seems to have calmed down.

Just wanted to add a few things.

1920s Berlin is build on a 1:1 scale, thus letting me do more in a small space but also making it a lot easier to reproduce original buildings and items as I can just use the RL measurements, no math needed.

Math melts my brain.

I want to rebuild the Brandenburg Gate... so I find the RL measurements, copy them to SL and there you go.

I want a table or chair to be the right height for my avatar... I measure the ones in my RL home and there you go.

We do NOT require visitors to have a Prim Scale avatar (that is what I call realistically scaled avatars as we use the prim measurements), we just warn overly tall people that they may bump their heads now and then.

I too would like it if the avatar build window used the Prim Scale (no idea why someone decided to measure a prim as 50x50x50 cm and then ignore that scale when they created the basic avatars) or would allow us to put actual RL measurements into the windows and see it recreated as an avatar.

Want to be yourself in SL, just get a tape measurer, measure yourself, put the numbers in, done.

And yes, of course, anyone can be as tall as they like, have the most amazing fantasy or animal or robot avatar.

But I just like realism.

That means that most of the buildings and apartments in 1920s Berlin are tiny, especially compared to most houses in SL.

We have people living in just one 3 by 4 meter room that is often less then 3 meters high.

So it is a good idea to adjust your camera, I have mine right behind the avatars head.

This allows me to actually experience feeling like I'm in a small space and being relieved when I go outside for a walk

Of course, if everything in your sim is "small", you do have to readjust many of your items, luckily good creators make this easy.

I also had to build a lot of stuff myself, but because there aren't very much 1920s european things for poor people out there, I had to do that anyway.

Oh and to finally go back to the main topic of this discussion... yes SL is expensive, yes Tier could go down a little.

But sometimes not being able to be able to afford SL is a matter of management.

I started 1920s Berlin on a tiny rented parcel and promised myself never to spend any RL money on it.

I did break that promise but over the last almost 4 years, Berlin has been paying for itself.

Start small, get a community behind it, find supporters, get shopkeepers, get tenants.

Don't grow unless you can afford it.

Of course this may not work exactly in the same way for you, but it might be worth trying to look at the financial side before you run a sim.

I've seen sims that I loved so much, vanish because the owner couldn't pay the rent even though I would have gladly helped pay for it if I had known!

Anyway, sorry for adding on to a discussion if it has already run its course.

Move along, nothing to see here.

##### Share on other sites

Coby Foden wrote:

It would be really cool if there were some
four or five different default views
instead of the present two (the default  and the mouse look).

For example:

1. Mouse look

2. Real first person view

3. Building/rezzing view

4. Additional view (lower view for walking)

5. Additional view (another lower view for walking)

All these views should be selectable with:

Keyboard shortcuts and/or buttons.

And naturally all those default views should be user configurable like the present default view is.

In the present default view - without adjusting - the camera is way too high
(for anything else than for newbies rezzing stuff perhaps)
which leads to the common trend of making the rooms very tall; to avoid hitting the camera on the ceiling.  And it leads also to distorted view of the avatar.  People may think that their avatar is short due to this default view
(I tend to call it "view from a tree top" :smileywink:)
.  And thus they follow the so common practice of making their avatars very tall, so that they would look "normal" when looked from the top of a tree.

I changed my camera view and now have the camera right behind me.

But I'd love to have a mouselook view without losing all the buttons, option to chat, etc.

A REAL first person view, like so many games have.

Let me see trough my avatars eyes and still be able to build, chat, interact, etc....

Doesn't sound so complicated does it?

##### Share on other sites

It's probably been said, but I am not going to wad through twenty pages of the thread to find out.

Second Life doesn't need to cost you ANYTHING.  You can even have the land you want, and not pay ANYTHING.  But you DO have to work for it.

Learn to create content.  Sell it on the Marketplace or in world.  Or provide a service.  Make \$L.  Use the money from your efforts to pay for your Second Life.

If Anshe Chung can do it, you can do it.

##### Share on other sites

Jo Yardley wrote:

This takes me back to an old discussion in which we completely disagreed. I wish you'd posted the above pics at that time because they actually prove the point I was making; i.e. you can't see what's under your feet, which makes a huge difference in an enclosed space. You've forced yourself to use SL without being able to see what's near you but it's not the most convenient way of using SL, and it's why things need to be bigger in SL than in RL - unless you force yourself, of course..

##### Share on other sites

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

## Create an account

Register a new account