Jump to content

Dimensions, Avatars, Content - some thoughts


Coby Foden
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3850 days.

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

Recommended Posts

Because there have been speculations that I am trying to ”force” (lol) everybody ”to be the same as me” especially concerning avatar heights, I decided to clarify things here a bit.

First of all I want to point out that I do support using meters as the sole accurate measurement system that should be used in SL in content creation. And yes, it should be seen as one to one correlation: 1 meter in SL equals exactly to 1 meter in RL. Any other definition just shows ignorance. We could use any name for SL meter, say ”Unit” for short ”u”. Even then it should be seen as 1 u = 1 RL meter. There are many unrefutable benefits in content creation in seeing the SL measurement unit this way.

Ok, let's go to avatar heights. First of all what are the human heights? There are many studies about this. For example one is here: Human population height variations

[Quote from the page]
Demographic data from the USA.
Men have a median height of 5′ 8.5″ (174 cm), women have a median height of 5′ 3.5″ (162 cm).
[Unquote]

The results are shown in Bell curve:

Bell-Human-height-curve.png

Note: Data has been collected from about 120 000 women and about 110 000 men. Should be good enough sample size for anybody.

See, everybody in RL is not exactly the same height in RL. Isn't that nice!
Nor should avatars be exactly the same as any other avatar in SL.

Please note carefully (thanks): :matte-motes-smile:
I have never supported or spread such silly idea that every avatar should be the same size.

Let's see how the Bell curve distribution would work in avatars. Just for a mind experiment let's suppose:

• The appearance editor would show the true mesh height of an avatar instead of ”Agent Height”
• Default male avatar would be exactly 174 cm tall
• Default female avatar would be exactly 162 cm tall
• All content would have been made to the sizes what they would be in RL (using 1 RLm = 1 SLm naturally!)
(Side note:
Houses would be larger than in RL, they are cheap in SL, avatars like larger houses. BUT: the houses should not be unrealistically huge. There is no reason for that, especially because the avatar heights would be according to RL human heights. Smaller avatars, smaller content needed.)

Would that have meant that every male avatar in SL would have been exactly 174 cm and every female avatar exactly 162 cm? Of course not. People do tweak their avatars. I suppose that many would have liked to make their avatars the same height what they are in RL. Then there are people who are short in RL and they might want to use somewhat taller avatar. And vice versa. All natural choices. I'm quite confident that the avatar population heights in SL would have been pretty close to those Bell curves derived from human population. At present the avatar height Bell curves lie far away to the right from RL Bell curves. The median for avatar heights might be at 200 cm or even further. (This shows that SL is ridden with acromegaly and gigantism - no cure implemented so far due to resistance from those who like it.)

So, with RL sizing everybody would be happy. No complaints in the forums about avatar and content sizes. (This post would have not been needed to weite either.)  Everything would look nice and consistent in sizes and relative scales. It would not happen anymore that when somebody gives you a cup of coffee you suddenly find some soup bowl on your hand. Czari could make her avatar the same size as she is in RL, and she would look tall – what she likes – among other avatars. Naturally she could make herself even taller. With RL sized mesh content we could decorate our land and houses with more items than would be case with grossly oversized similar content. Grossly oversized prim content hogs land area – grossly oversized mesh content hogs land area and LI. With RL sizing of content everybody would win.

Unfortunately there are still many – possibly a lot – of designers who rely on inaccurate GAH method of sizing  in creating their content. They just support to continue and spread even more the present chaos in content sizes and relative scales of things. Which is a real pity. Do they not want anything better really? I wonder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Because there have been speculations that I am trying to ”force” (lol) everybody ”to be the same as me” especially concerning avatar heights, I decided to clarify things here a bit.

First of all I want to point out that I do support using meters as the sole accurate measurement system that should be used in SL in content creation. And yes, it should be seen as one to one correlation: 1 meter in SL equals exactly to 1 meter in RL. Any other definition just shows ignorance. We could use any name for SL meter, say ”Unit” for short ”u”. Even then it should be seen as 1 u = 1 RL meter. There are many unrefutable benefits in content creation in seeing the SL measurement unit this way.

Ok, let's go to avatar heights. First of all what are the human heights? There are many studies about this. For example one is here: Human population height variations

[Quote from the page]
Demographic data from the USA.
Men have a median height of 5′ 8.5″ (174 cm), women have a median height of 5′ 3.5″ (162 cm).
[Unquote]

The results are shown in Bell curve:

Bell-Human-height-curve.png

Note: Data has been collected from about 120 000 women and about 110 000 men. Should be good enough sample size for anybody.

See, everybody in RL is not exactly the same height in RL. Isn't that nice!
Nor should avatars be exactly the same as any other avatar in SL.

Please note carefully (thanks): :matte-motes-smile:
I have never supported or spread such silly idea that every avatar should be the same size.

Let's see how the Bell curve distribution would work in avatars. Just for a mind experiment let's suppose:

• The appearance editor would show the true mesh height of an avatar instead of ”Agent Height”
• Default male avatar would be exactly 174 cm tall
• Default female avatar would be exactly 162 cm tall
• All content would have been made to the sizes what they would be in RL (using 1 RLm = 1 SLm naturally!)
(Side note:
Houses would be larger than in RL, they are cheap in SL, avatars like larger houses. BUT: the houses should not be unrealistically huge. There is no reason for that, especially because the avatar heights would be according to RL human heights. Smaller avatars, smaller content needed.)

Would that have meant that every male avatar in SL would have been exactly 174 cm and every female avatar exactly 162 cm? Of course not. People do tweak their avatars. I suppose that many would have liked to make their avatars the same height what they are in RL. Then there are people who are short in RL and they might want to use somewhat taller avatar. And vice versa. All natural choices. I'm quite confident that the avatar population heights in SL would have been pretty close to those Bell curves derived from human population. At present the avatar height Bell curves lie far away to the right from RL Bell curves. The median for avatar heights might be at 200 cm or even further. (This shows that SL is ridden with acromegaly and gigantism - no cure implemented so far due to resistance from those who like it.)

So, with RL sizing everybody would be happy. No complaints in the forums about avatar and content sizes. (This post would have not been needed to weite either.)  Everything would look nice and consistent in sizes and relative scales. It would not happen anymore that when somebody gives you a cup of coffee you suddenly find some soup bowl on your hand. Czari could make her avatar the same size as she is in RL, and she would look tall – what she likes – among other avatars. Naturally she could make herself even taller. With RL sized mesh content we could decorate our land and houses with more items than would be case with grossly oversized similar content. Grossly oversized prim content hogs land area – grossly oversized mesh content hogs land area and LI. With RL sizing of content everybody would win.

Unfortunately there are still many – possibly a lot – of designers who rely on inaccurate GAH method of sizing  in creating their content. They just support to continue and spread even more the present chaos in content sizes and relative scales of things. Which is a real pity. Do they not want anything better really? I wonder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Syo Emerald wrote:

Oh great...So I have the high of a man in RL, because I'm not under 1.70m? :catindifferent:

Take another look at the graph, the probability of being a tall woman doesn't approach nearly zero until about 190cm. You can further assume some skewing due to sample size and variation (since graphs like this are usually compiled from local or limited sets, not global/universal sets).

And lastly, just because a graph says something does not mean that it's true in every case. Bell curves highlight trends, not actualities, and being slightly outside the curve doesn't change who you are. If you're a member of a recently emerging generation, congratulations - the fully grown average adult height has been trending upwards slowly, and these curves will eventually shift to the right of the graph over time, as present and future generations mature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Syo Emerald wrote:

Oh great...So I have the high of a man in RL, because I'm not under 1.70m? :catindifferent:

Nothing to worry about Syo.

If the data was collected in Netherlands (there were news just recently that the Dutch are generally the tallest people in Europe) I'm sure you that would be clearly and safely be on female side on that Bell curve.

:smileyhappy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Coby Foden wrote:

Ok, let's go to avatar heights. First of all what are the human heights? There are many studies about this. For example one is here:

Demographic data from the USA.

Men have a median height of 5′ 8.5″ (174 cm), women have a median height of 5′ 3.5″ (162 cm).

[unquote]

The results are shown in Bell curve:

Bell-Human-height-curve.png

Note: Data has been collected from about 120 001 women and about 110 000 men. Should be good enough sample size for anybody.

Coby, I returned to the website you mined for the height data, and checked the box for "Nefariousness".

Note the spike at 1.575m.

Peak Nefariousness.jpg

Maddy is 5' 2" in RL, or about 1.575m.

Coincidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm... interesting. :smileysurprised:

It might be a good idea to start avoiding women with that height then?
Or at least making an effort trying to speak to them softly so that they would not be upset in any way...

But then again, speaking too softly might trigger the said characteristic to surface!

:smileywink:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Czari Zenovka wrote:


Coby Foden wrote:

 

So, with RL sizing everybody would be happy. No complaints in the forums about avatar and content sizes. (This post would have not been needed to weite either.)  Everything would look nice and consistent in sizes and relative scales. It would not happen anymore that when somebody gives you a cup of coffee you suddenly find some soup bowl on your hand.
Czari could make her avatar the same size as she is in RL, and she would look tall – what she likes – among other avatars. Naturally she could make herself even taller.

 

 

How did I become the sole-named subject of this post when I only made a few posts in the other thread???

when she said..i need one volunteer!!

you didn't notice..but the rest of us all took a step back..

sorry!!

hehehehe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a height of 1,78 I'd have made a good photo/fashion model when I was younger but I had/have a silly babyface with completely inacceptable punky hair and was always a bit too skinny. I'm surprised to still find myself taller than the average American male of today. You people are tiny! Maybe that's because a huge percentage of your population are latin.

Compared with the girls of today I'm not sticking out anymore. The new generation ... wow, they are super tall. Unfortunately many of them are also much fatter than we kids of the punk generation. Stil I'm shocked that with an avie height of 1,88 (6'2") I'm a regular dwarf in SL. Any smaller and most prim clothes won't fit me anymore and even the mesh XS would be too huge for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Ceka Cianci wrote:


Czari Zenovka wrote:

 

How did I become the sole-named subject of this post when I only made a few posts in the other thread???

when she said..i need one volunteer!!

you didn't notice..but the rest of us all took a step back..

Ceka is right. The situation was similar to this one:

Any-volunteers.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Orca Flotta wrote:

With a height of 1,78 I'd have made a good photo/fashion model when I was younger but I had/have a silly babyface with completely inacceptable punky hair and was always a bit too skinny. I'm surprised to still find myself taller than the average American male of today. You people are tiny! Maybe that's because a huge percentage of your population are latin.

Compared with the girls of today I'm not sticking out anymore. The new generation ... wow, they are super tall. Unfortunately many of them are also much fatter than we kids of the punk generation. Stil I'm shocked that with an avie height of 1,88 (6'2") I'm a regular dwarf in SL. Any smaller and most prim clothes won't fit me anymore and even the mesh XS would be too huge for me.

Hmm, I don't think the sizes of mesh would make you problems because of height. Just yesterday, I tried a meshtop that the creator advertised would include all standartsizes and therefore doesn't need an alphalayer. At least when it comes to the chest, standartsize XS is not wearable for a woman, who at least wants a little bit chest and breast. While on the other side of the scales L requires a fat chest (and I really mean fat and wide).

So, mesh is mainly not an issue with high, but with other sliders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm so we have the assumption that 1m RL is 1m SL? Thats plain wrong, there is nothing in SL that allows a comparison.

And we have the average heights of a part of the humanity. Thats irrelevant for SL and even irrelevant for a single individual.

There is word that small people use less space. Nope, only if you adjust the standard SL camera and even then it's not comparable to RL. The limit I encoutered were prims and not space btw. Regarding prims. My mesh increases in LI if its bigger than a car. Well I don't have that big furniture. Not to mention that I personally prefer halls over doghouses. (my room heights are between 6m and 30m atm. :)

Guess I am completely incompatible to that SL / RL comparisons and think that both have not much to do with each other. :) So for the RL size -> SL fans. Have fun with your imagination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You are mistaken that there has been any speculation that you have been trying to "force" everyone to be RL heights. But you have been debating in favour of it. You can't force anyone, and nobody even suggested it.

2. Nobody has even suggested that you support that every avatar should be the same height (the bolded sentence in your post), so I don't know why you wrote and emphasised that sentence.

3. You are mistaken if you believe that anyone has stated that RL and SL meters are not the same. What was said (by me) is that, if you treat them as being different, your desire that general avatar heights = general RL people heights is already true, so there is no need to change anyone's mind about avatar heights.

4. You yourself have agreed that things in SL cannot work properly in RL sizes. I.e you agreed that rooms need to be bigger for it to work. But, if rooms are bigger, furniture needs to be bigger to make the rooms look right. And then, of course, avatars need to be bigger to be right for the furniture.

 

I don't know the purpose for this thread. Sizes in SL works fine as they are so why produce graphs that show RL and SL heights? The SL world is not the RL world. I can only assume that you are still attempting to persuade people to have RL equivalent heights. Why not be like almost all users and accept that SL is not a reflection of the real world and that things are bigger in SL by comparison. Apart from a tiny number of people, it works wonderfully well, whereas SL sizes = RL sizes doesn't work at all unless you abandon part of it - rooms.

And finally. The SL world is what it is. It is not the real world. It is the SL world. Individuals can change their part of it for themselves, but, globally, it will always remain what it is, and the best thing that anyone can do is accept that fact.

 

 

ETA:

A question: since the sizes in SL have worked perfectly well for many years, why would people en masse suddenly want to change everything to RL-equivalent sizes?  In the other thread, it was suggested that mesh clothes and LI might cause a general reduction is sizes, but someone in this thread suggested that it wouldn't (that's how I read it, anyway). If it does cause a reduction, so be it, but persuading the population to go down to RL-equivalent sizes, just so that a very tiny number of people can be satisfied, isn't going to happen.

It's a genuine question though, Coby. Why would the population want to reduce everything to RL-equivalent sizes? What benefit would there be in doing it? To date, I don't think I've ever seen you say why it's a good idea - only that you prefer it. So please tell me why you think it's a good idea for avatars in general to be the equivalent heights of RL people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Czari Zenovka wrote:

How did I become the sole-named subject of this post when I only made a few posts in the other thread???

It's probably because, not many days ago, you stated your RL height, and the heights of some of your family as being generally tall. I think it was in my thread, so it would be fresh in Coby's mind. That's my guess, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Nova Convair wrote:

Hmmm so we have the assumption that 1m RL is 1m SL? Thats plain wrong,
there is nothing in SL that allows a comparison.

Oh haaay it's this nonsense again - I am shocked. Learn2physics Ms. Convair, and please stop saying such things as if they were facts! :D

Please consult the relevant pages in the SL wiki:-

SL: Gravity and Mass - note that the default gravity for all physical objects is 1.0

LSL for Kilogram conversion

LSL for gravity defiance

LSL Overview of Physics

LSL Overview of Scale

Hahaha. Enjoy your thread, Coby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

ETA:

A question: since the sizes in SL have worked perfectly well for many years, why would people en masse suddenly want to change everything to RL-equivalent sizes?  In the other thread, it was suggested that mesh clothes and LI might cause a general reduction is sizes, but someone in this thread suggested that it wouldn't (that's how I read it, anyway). If it does cause a reduction, so be it, but persuading the population to go down to RL-equivalent sizes, just so that a very tiny number of people can be satisfied, isn't going to happen.

 

Since at least mid-2010, the "Edit My Shape" dialog has included a height statistic measured in meters or feet. Creating one's avatar is one of the first things someone does in SL and many people set their height by using this number and based it on RL scale without being aware of the oversized SL environment. These people find older furniture, etc. to be too large for their avatars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have a point there, Theresa, but, since the general height of avatars in SL is taller than the general height of people, why  would the population want to change it? If some or many people first set their avatar heights according to an RL height, and if they can't find stuff to suit their height, they change it. It's necessary because of the camera position. RL-sized rooms don't work. The evidence is that they change it, presumably when they mix with other avatars and find how short they are, because the general range of heights is taller that they are in RL.

And, as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) the avatar height slider is a different measurement to the prim measurement, even though they both use meters. It used to be, anyway, and it probably still is. So anyone who sets their height with the Appearance editor, would get it wrong anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure? Some very old furniture is still oversized for me (and my avatar is larger than a most reallife women), but the first encounter with height for a newbie are the other avatars around him/her together with freebieavatars they buy and their own image of beauty.

My avatar is somewhat between 1.95-2.00m depending on the shoes and I'm feeling somewhere in the middle of the scales, when I'm in social places. If I would go smaller, I would have trouble with couple dances and looks small in more furniture. At the moment, I fit into most of those I own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Syo Emerald wrote:

Some very old furniture is still oversized for me (and my avatar is larger than a most reallife women)

Some of the very old furniture that I sell is a bit over-big. But I still sell it because it still sells. I sell smaller-sized ranges too. To be honest, quite a while ago I'd wanted to do away with the larger stuff, not only because it's larger but mainly because it's made from standard prims and my later stuff uses sculpties. but it still sells so I leave it on sale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I don't think the sizes of mesh would make you problems because of height.

Yes and no, Syo. Since I'm small and skinny in SL I prefer my chest to be rather flat. So, yes, XS is already too big for me. See this comparison stickfigure (me) vs milk-cow (a Lolas wearing friend):

stickfigure vs milk-cow

OMG! :smileysurprised: Is my noggin too big again? No wonder milk-cow calls me "lollypop".

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

1. You are mistaken that there has been any speculation that you have been trying to "force" everyone to be RL heights. But you have been debating in favour of it. You can't force anyone, and nobody even suggested it.

2. Nobody has even suggested that you support that every avatar should be the same height (the bolded sentence in your post), so I don't know why you wrote and emphasised that sentence.

3. You are mistaken if you believe that anyone has stated that RL and SL meters are not the same. What was said (by me) is that, if you treat them as being different, your desire that general avatar heights = general RL people heights is already true, so there is no need to change anyone's mind about avatar heights.

4. You yourself have agreed that things in SL cannot work properly in RL sizes. I.e you agreed that rooms need to be bigger for it to work. But, if rooms are bigger, furniture needs to be bigger to make the rooms look right. And then, of course, avatars need to be bigger to be right for the furniture.

1. I just wanted to make it crystal clear that I'm not trying to force anybody to be anything. I'm not even "persuading" (as you say in your very post I'm replying to) anybody. I just present ideas how I see things, and what methods I think would make SL a more beautiful and coherent place. And I really do think that building to RL scale would be very good step towards that goal. Clear enough?

2. Again just to make it crystal clear that I do not support equal avatar size for everybody.

3. You are playing with words "the meters can be the same" but "treat them as different".

    (you are an expert in wordplay, sometimes I have to read many times to clearly understand what you have said)

4. I have said that RL sized avatars and objects do work perfectly in SL. You have said so too. We are in agreement regarding that. We both agree that avatars need larger rooms to feel comfortable.

 

I want to point out:

Big avatars need large rooms, small avatars need less large rooms than big avatars. Why should small avatars need as large rooms as big avatars? Anyway for both, the rooms would be larger that in RL.

Let's suppose a male avatar which is 2.20 m tall would be ok in a room measuring 7 m x 7 m. Then there is mean RL height male avatar 1.74 m tall. What would be suitable room size for it? Surely the big avatar's room would be too large in comparison. To get the exact same feeling for small avatar as the big one has we need to do:

Floor length of small avatar's room = (1.74 / 2.20) * 7 = 5.53

Thus for the same room experience:

• Big avatar's room 7 m x 7 m

• Small avatar's room 5.53 m x 5.53 m

 

Your argument "if rooms are bigger, furniture needs to be bigger to make the rooms look right. And then, of course, avatars need to be bigger to be right for the furniture" is not correct. You are totally wrong in thinking that way. Think very carefully again. You are just going in circles with that statement, and in effect you suggest (unconsiously or knowingly)  that the big avatar has reached a size "sweet spot" where everything looks right. Of course you have earlier denied of supporting any "sweet spot" idea. Draw exactly dimensioned layouts from both rooms and furniture, and observe. (Or easier make the large room with large furniture, make a copy, shrink the copy by 1.74/2.20 and there you have the rooms to compare.)

 

We can say that the 7x7 room is all right for the big avatar, and the 5.53x5.53 room is all right for the small avatar. Small avatar is happy with RL sized furniture, big avatar needs larger furniture, fit for its size. Visually inspecting the rooms, the furniture in each of them occupy relatively the same areas from the floors.

 


Phil Deakins wrote:

I don't know the purpose for this thread. Sizes in SL works fine as they are so why produce graphs that show RL and SL heights? The SL world is
not
the RL world. I can only assume that you are still attempting to persuade people to have RL equivalent heights. Why not be like almost all users and accept that SL is not a reflection of the real world and that things are bigger in SL by comparison. Apart from a tiny number of people, it works wonderfully well, whereas SL sizes = RL sizes doesn't work at all unless you abandon part of it - rooms.

And finally. The SL world is what it is. It is not the real world. It is the SL world. Individuals can change their part of it for themselves, but, globally, it will always remain what it is, and the best thing that anyone can do is accept that fact.

Please don't keep repeating over and over again that SL is not RL. It adds nothing to this discussion. lol

[shout on] Coby Foden knows that SL and RL are not the same.[shout off] There! :smileywink:

As I said above I'm not trying to persuade anybody to be anything. You could take this as education and an eye opener, things could be different, and in mind better, than what they have been so far.

If you travel a lot in SL, by foot and really look at things, you would see that everything is not all right concerning sizing of things. Some designers rely on GAH method (like you). I'm sure that there are many sizes of GAH, there is no globally defined size of GAH. Each designer who relies on GAH naturally have their own estimation of GAH. So GAH method in designing is not accurate. Things all over SL are not scaled equally. Some designers make large things, some make even larger things. And anything in between. There are designers who actually do use meters (surprise!). But most them of scale up things like the GAH people. Some scale up by 1.5, some might scale up by 2.0. And again anything in between. In my mind this is not a very good thing. It makes SL to like some topsy turvy place. Nothing is exact. Keen eye notices this easily. If you stay mostly in the same place always, everything could look "okey'ish". But travelling all over SL gives a different picture how things are.

Your view that "we should accept things as they are" sounds pessimistic to me. Why should we accept it as we know that things could be better? I would be very happy to see that SL was more consistent and thus more beautiful than what it is today.

 


Phil Deakins wrote:

ETA:

A question: since the sizes in SL have worked perfectly well for many years, why would people en masse suddenly want to change everything to RL-equivalent sizes?  In the other thread, it was suggested that mesh clothes and LI might cause a general reduction is sizes, but someone in this thread suggested that it wouldn't (that's how I read it, anyway). If it does cause a reduction, so be it, but persuading the population to go down to RL-equivalent sizes, just so that a very tiny number of people can be satisfied, isn't going to happen.

It's a genuine question though, Coby.
Why
would the population want to reduce everything to RL-equivalent sizes? What benefit would there be in doing it? To date, I don't think I've ever seen you say why it's a good idea - only that you prefer it. So please tell me why you think it's a good idea for avatars in general to be the equivalent heights of RL people.

The sizes in SL have not worked perfectly well for many years. It is just how you have observed things. I have observed things differently. Avatar of any size can see that content in SL is not equally scaled. It's not "perfect" situation.

 

How soon or how late mesh content will trigger reducing of sizes depends on do people care about LI savings using RL sized content. The savings in LI and in land area are not miniscule - they do have meaningful size. But it's up to general population and designers. It is interesting to observe what will happen.

If you haven't seen me state the benefits of RL sizing earlier then you have not read all my posts thoroughly.

It's not that "I just prefer it".

 

 

To state clearly the benefits what I see in RL sizing:

• LI and land area savings using mesh content

-- lower LI means that people could decorate their homes with more objects than would be the case with large upscaled ojects

• In prim content land area saving

  --- instead of that house occupies the whole parcel, with smaller house one could have nice small garden

• Consistent scaling of things (Means using: 1 SLm = 1 RLm)

• More beautiful SL experience for everybody

• If Linden Lab finally could find a way to tell the true mesh height in appearance editor:

-- no more confusion about avatar heights

   (now the situation is a chaos: different viewers give different heights, measuring with prim is the only accurate one)

Again, I'm not trying to persuade people to change anything.  Take this as a fun reading how things could be instead of how they are now.

Happy SLing all, thanks for reading.  :smileyhappy: :heart:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

 

And, as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) the avatar height slider is a different measurement to the prim measurement, even though they both use meters. It used to be, anyway, and it probably still is. So anyone who sets their height with the Appearance editor, would get it wrong anyway.

To be clear:

The avatar appearance editor uses exactly the same meter (exactly the same lenght) as is used for prim and land measurement. Meter is the same meter all over SL. There are no different sizes of meter.

But something is wrong anyway?

Yes. In the appearance editor it just says "Height". Naturally people - who don't know better - assume that this is avatar's mesh height. But it is not.

In Linden Lab viewer the "Height" shown is actually "Agent Height". This agent height is shorter than avatar's mesh height is. So people who adjust their height relying on this value are actually taller than what they think they are. Linden Lab did disservice to the users in naming that thing just "Height". It would have been better if they had left it out altogether - so far until they have found out a way of showing the exact mesh height instead.

Some TPV viewers try to show the avatar's mesh height instead of agent height. They use a calculation: they take the agent height and then add a correction factor. They come quite close to the correct mesh height (about within 1 cm to 2 cm).

Unfortunately no viewer has a method to measure and show directly the true mesh height. Therefore the only reliable method to get the avatar's mesh is measure with prim.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3850 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...