Why do some houses suffer from gigantism?

[Tari Landar]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Nope. I'm being perfectly serious. I remember plenty of discussions about why things are big in SL, but I remember no discussion about the idea of consistent sizes; i.e. for furniture, houses, avatars, and such, but especially furniture.

---

Ok, in thta case, read some of the threads I posted, consistency is discussed, and has been, numerous times. Though, like I said, some of the threads may not have started off, or even ended discussing primarily that, of course, since they all tend to morph into numerous discussions, and topics.

[bebejee]

Phil, thats exactly what I meant, creators should only demonstrate stuff suited for the majoritys needs, tinies and giants need to be told that the stuff can be rezied for them.

[Coby Foden]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

When it comes to the whole sizing issue, camera placement is a factor, and perhaps a very large one. But it is not the only thing that effects this.

---

Imo, the default camera position is the only factor. I know about the discrepency between prim meters and avatar meters, but I don't see how that causes things to be bigger..

---

Phil, there is no discrepancy between "avatar" meters and prim meters. They are exactly the same. (For clarification to anybody who got confused: By "avatar" meter Phil means the meter shown in the viewer appearance editor.)

What is wrong is that Linden Lab viewer does not show avatar shape height, the height what we see, and can measure with prim. What the viewer shows is avatar's Agent Height. Agent Height is shorter than avatar mes is. If we could see avatar's collision box then we could measure it with a prim and see that the prim measuremet and the viewer measurement give exactly the same height in meters.

What Linden Lab did wrong is that in the viewer it just says "Height". People (not nowing what height it shows) think that it shows the mesh height. Confusion, confusion among many is the result.

So there is no discrepancy with prim meters and the appearance editor meters. They are the same.

(Yes, I know even after this clarification you still will say that "there is something wrong with the appearance editor meter because it appears not to be the same as prim meter")

Oh, well... :smileywink:

 

PS.

Because the appearance editor shows Agent Height instead of the mesh height people unknowingly do make their avatar taller than they think. Measuring by prim is the only exactly accurate way to find out how tall an avatar is.

[Coby Foden]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Nope. I'm being perfectly serious. I remember plenty of discussions about why things are big in SL, but I remember no discussion about the idea of consistent sizes; i.e. for furniture, houses, avatars, and such, but especially furniture.

---

Ok, in thta case, read some of the threads I posted, consistency is discussed, and has been, numerous times. Though, like I said, some of the threads may not have started off, or even ended discussing primarily that, of course, since they all tend to morph into numerous discussions, and topics.

---

I'm pretty sure that I did mention consistent sizing, at least once, in one long thread.

Phil participated in that thread too.

[Tari Landar]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

I'm pretty sure that I did mention consistent sizing, at least once, in one long thread.

Phil participated in that thread too.

---

I know you did, I'm pretty sure one of the threads you started was in the list of ones I'd found too, lol. I also know Phil participated in some of the threads discussing consistent sizing being a concern (hence why I figured he was deliberately being obtuse just to argue, lol)

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

SL is

not

RL, ...

---

It is totally uneccessary to state so emphatically that SL is not RL (over and over again). I'm sure all SL users know exactly which is which. Nobody here is so delusional who would think that they are the same. :smileywink:

---

Its curious that 'SL is not RL' is often stated by persons who also often state that 'SL is not a game'.

These are not directly contradictory statements - but they do seem... out of sync.

I think everyone understood the OP to include sarcastic exageration. Though some would choose to willfully ignore this for the purpose of creating argument.

 

As far as consistency is concerned - the sign of a good builder is 'internal consistency'. Or put another way: proper proportions.

As in... if the door is 153.75% bigger than a 'real life' door... then then window had better be EXACTLY 153.75% bigger than a 'real life' window of its design style, as well. And so too... the stairs, the fireplace, the lights, the... etc...

 

Sadly because not all builders do build to the same scale... It ends up being 'on us all' consumers to learn how to mod almost everything we buy to fit our avatars... unless we happen to be lucky enough to be using the same shape as the builder in question.

 

But that said...

- If you're mod, I could care less what actual size you go for because I've long ago given up on everyone building 'too scale'. But whatever you go for... I will cheer you or find fault with you, if you're not internally consistent about it. And even more... if you go no-mod while claiming to be mod...

 

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

there's no good reason to generally copy RL sizes

, but there is one

very

good reason not to - the default camera position.

---

T-Rex arms.

Even at the 1:1 scale, for a female to have proportionally correct arms for her avatar requires a dial setting ABOVE 90. Sometimes you need to go above 100 - which is not possible... and the taller the avatar gets, the more likely this is.

Its not that simple though, as some dials that will make you taller will stretch the limbs, and some won't. Its just gets trickier the taller you go - limiting the variety of body shapes you can make and still have long enough arms.

 

So there is a good reason to go 1:1, and another reason not to. The question then is: which reason is easier to overcome?

 

Oh and... there IS a good reason for consistency. penny points it out in her blogs. No one is short, and no one is tall - if there is no consistent scale.

Consider a 'Na'vi' from the Avatar movie. They're supposed to be twice as tall as a human, give or take. If everyone was at 1:1 scale, you could just "almost" make one of these by maxing out height (but she'd have T-Rex arms...).

And you could sit her next to a Tolkien 'Hobbit' made by doing the dials in the other direction. But as it is now... these two and a 1:1 avatar - all look equally 'normal height' - because there is no definition of what is normal.

- The desired impact for all three is lost.

 

[Aethelwine]

Here I am with a 100l$ bottle of no Mod wine. I am 1.75m tall so no midget.

Whilst in real life I would be pleased to get a gallon sized bottle for what I thought I was going to be normal sized, in SL it is a dissappointment.  

 

 

The glass alone holds about a pint..The way she drinks it, it is a wonder she can stand up at all after a few minutes. hehe

[Phil Deakins]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

(Phil Deakins replied in blue):

 

Would there be any benefits if we used RL as a reference in content building? Surely there would be. There would no more guessing to what size to make a chair, a table, a kitchen sink, a cabinet, a cup, a glass, a plate, etc. You just measure the RL items and make them exactly to same size in SL, using 1 RLm = 1 SLm.

You know very well, from the thrads on that subject, that the default camera position doesn't allow it.

---

 

---

Phil you know very well that the "

sacred default camera setting

"

(what you refuse to touch because it is the default) :smileywink:

does not prevent anybody in any way from creating content in RL sizes. You can do it, and you

do know

it. Please stop confusing people by saying something what is not true. Thanks. :matte-motes-smile:

I didn't say that the camera position prevents RL sized content from being made. I said nothing like that. What the camera's default position doesn't allow is making everything in RL sizes - rooms specifically, and that causes furniture to be bigger, etc. It's not me who is confusing people, it's you who reply to me by changing what I said. That's confusing.

I know that you are referring to room sizes (somebody new here might not know it). They go: "Darn, not possible to make any object RL size here, ufff... " :smileysad:

If anyone reads, then there is no confusion. What would you prefer? Me saying that RL sized rooms and furniture are just fine, when they are not?

Well, we have already agreed, in one earlier very long discussion, that for avatar comfort, for ease of movement it is a good idea to make the interiors bigger than in RL. If the avatar is average RL height, and if the camera is located away from its default "sacred" location to a much better natural view position, then the interiors need not to be hugely larger than in RL, for comfort and ease of movement. However, if the camera is kept in the default location and the avatar is very tall then huge interiors are needed.

But, as you said, rooms do need to be larger, which results in larger furniture or it would look much too small for the room. As a furniture maker I've seen it and known it for years. As a result of that, avatars need to be larger too.

The default camera position is no excuse for extra large content creation. We know that the camera is not locked in that position. Any content creator should be aware of it. Not knowing that it is not locked is no excuse either. Content creators should familiarize themselves with the platform well; especially those who sell content.

The default camera position is no reason to make

gigantic

houses, but it does mean that house contents end up being larger because houses are necessarily larger.

You are right - the cam position isn't locked, but what percentage of people change it? Content creators need to make content suitable for the most common, which is the default cam position. And I assure you that content creators are very well aware of it. That's why you don't see much RL-sized furniture. Just because the cam position can be changed, doesn't mean that most people change it.

You claim that large interiors need large furniture because RL sized furniture would look too small. That's a funny claim.

It's not a funny claim at all. You are just waffling now, presumably because you don't have any good argument against something you don't want to be true. I've been in the furniture making business for a lot of years, and I promise you that RL-sized furniture looks way too small in typical SL rooms in homes.

Where I live we many large malls. These malls have large interior spaces where there are seats for people to rest their feet, there are many small cafeterias in the middle of the open areas, there are snack bars. Plenty of empty space all around. The ceiling is very high. All the furniture is normal standard size, same size what people have in their homes. Not a single very large, oversized piece of furniture is seen anywhere. And nobody complains "

Why the furniture is so small in this big place?

" For everybody everything looks normal in the scene.

We are talking about homes, not malls etc. You put an RL-sized sofa against a wall in a typical SL living room, and you'll see that it looks much too small and unrealistic for the room. It's no good arguing about it Coby. I've been in the business for years and I know.

Normal size furniture works perfectly in RL in big spaces. Why do you feel that it wouldn't work in SL?

I didn't say it wouldn't work in the sort of large spaces that you mentioned. It doesn't work in homes. Please stop changing what we are discussing. Why do you change the object of the discussion? Are you hoping that, if you change it, you can win a point?

To me, your feeling that way makes no sense at all. Is it just a thing what you have deeply instilled in your mind ('

it does not work

'), or what is it?

It's deeply ingrained in my mind due to my extensive experience of it. It doesn't matter if it makes sense to you or not. Unless I'm mistaken, you are one of the minority who want their avatar to be more or less RL sized, and for no apparent reason. It's a 'thing' with you - almost a principle.

Content creators create for the majority if they can, because they want to sell to the majority, and they can with homes and furniture. In very recent times, there are more shorter avs than there used to be, and it would benefit content creators to cater for both, as I do in a small way. But the old avatar heights are still the majority as far as I know. Whenever I go to a place where there are plenty of avatars, I'm never noticably taller than the others, but there is the occasional avatar that is significantly and very noticably shorter than the rest. That's the RL-sized one.

---

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

bebejee wrote:

Phil, thats exactly what I meant, creators should only demonstrate stuff suited for the majoritys needs, tinies and giants need to be told that the stuff can be rezied for them.

---

I don't think that houses are resizable from menus, and it can be awkward resizing them using the Edit box. It used to be the case that houses came in multiple parts - not linked. If that's still the case, then many or most people wouldn't be able to resize them very well.

I don't buy houses so I don't have any significant experience of them, but aren't they rezzable before you buy? If they are, and if there is no indication about resizing, then surely it's simply a case of not buying something that's way too big when rezzed. If the only choice is a boxed house, without being able to see it rezzed, then it's a poor way of selling. The marketplace isn't really the place to buy buildings unless they can also be seen rezzed inworld.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

When it comes to the whole sizing issue, camera placement is a factor, and perhaps a very large one. But it is not the only thing that effects this.

---

Imo, the default camera position is the only factor. I know about the discrepency between prim meters and avatar meters, but I don't see how that causes things to be bigger..

---

Phil, there is no discrepancy between "avatar" meters and prim meters. They are exactly the same. (For clarification to anybody who got confused: By "avatar" meter Phil means the meter shown in the viewer appearance editor.)

What is wrong is that Linden Lab viewer does not show avatar shape height, the height what we see, and can measure with prim. What the viewer shows is avatar's Agent Height. Agent Height is shorter than avatar mes is. If we could see avatar's collision box then we could measure it with a prim and see that the prim measuremet and the viewer measurement give exactly the same height in meters.

What Linden Lab did wrong is that in the viewer it just says "Height". People (not nowing what height it shows) think that it shows the mesh height. Confusion, confusion among many is the result.

So there is no discrepancy with prim meters and the appearance editor meters. They are the same.

(Yes, I know even after this clarification you still will say that "there is something wrong with the appearance editor meter because it appears not to be the same as prim meter")

Oh, well... :smileywink:

 

PS.

Because the appearance editor shows Agent Height instead of the mesh height people unknowingly do make their avatar taller than they think. Measuring by prim is the only exactly accurate way to find out how tall an avatar is.

---

Ok, but I still say that the default camera position is the only cause of larger rooms and furniture.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Nope. I'm being perfectly serious. I remember plenty of discussions about why things are big in SL, but I remember no discussion about the idea of consistent sizes; i.e. for furniture, houses, avatars, and such, but especially furniture.

---

Ok, in thta case, read some of the threads I posted, consistency is discussed, and has been, numerous times. Though, like I said, some of the threads may not have started off, or even ended discussing primarily that, of course, since they all tend to morph into numerous discussions, and topics.

---

I'm pretty sure that I did mention consistent sizing, at least once, in one long thread.

Phil participated in that thread too.

---

It may be that consistent sizing was mentioned in such a thread, but the only discussions I remember were the same as we're discussing right now - whether or not RL sizes work well enough - only they were longer discussions than this one 

Consistent sizing has been mentioned in this thread, for instance, but it hasn't been discussed. I don't remember a discussion about it. It doesn't mean there weren't any. It only means I don't recall any, which is what I said. I'm pretty sure that I haven't participated in any. I'm not even sure that I know what is meant by 'consistent sizing'. Until I made a few smaller pieces, all my stuff was made to suit the sizes of me and my alt, and those avatars were intentionally of an average sort of height. As a result, all my stuff was consistently sized. But other people's stuff no doubt didn't conform to my consistency, although the sizes of everyone's furniture was more or less the same. So I don't know what is meant. Perhaps you would explain.

This bit about 'consistent sizing' started when you wrote, "It has been already discussed earlier many times over why it is important to use consistent sizing of things". Now you write, "I'm pretty sure that I did mention consistent sizing, at least once, in one long thread". Which is it? (a) it's been discussed "many times over" or (b) you're pretty sure you mentioned it once? Not only does a mention of something not constitute a discussion, but also there's no reason why anyone would remember a mere mention of something. As I already said, it's been mentioned in this thread, but it hasn't been discussed, so, to the best of my recollection, I still haven't participated in a discussion about 'consistent sizing'.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

I'm pretty sure that I did mention consistent sizing, at least once, in one long thread.

Phil participated in that thread too.

---

I know you did, I'm pretty sure one of the threads you started was in the list of ones I'd found too, lol. I also know Phil participated in some of the threads discussing consistent sizing being a concern (hence why I figured he was deliberately being obtuse just to argue, lol)

---

But I'm not being deliberately obtuse. I'm being perfectly genuine. I'm sure I've never participated in a discussion about consistent sizing. I've participated in discussions about whether or not RL sizes work well enough in SL, and in discussions about why houses and furniture are larger in SL than in RL, but that's all I remember. As I've just written to Coby, I don't even know what is meant by 'consistent sizing'. As far as I know, furniture creators create their stuff with consistent sizing, as I did until, after some years, I made a few smaller pieces as I saw more smaller avatars.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

SL is

not

RL, ...

---

It is totally uneccessary to state so emphatically that SL is not RL (over and over again). I'm sure all SL users know exactly which is which. Nobody here is so delusional who would think that they are the same. :smileywink:

---

Its curious that 'SL is not RL' is often stated by persons who also often state that 'SL is not a game'.

So?

These are not directly contradictory statements - but they do seem... out of sync.

Out of sync? What do you mean?

I think everyone understood the OP to include sarcastic exageration. Though some would choose to willfully ignore this for the purpose of creating argument.

Yes, and everyone understood wrongly. She really did mean gigantic houses, but everyone (except me

) thought she meant houses that were larger than RL houses due to the camera position.

 

I didn't know which she meant, so I asked.

 

---

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

Here I am with a 100l$ bottle of no Mod wine. I am 1.75m tall so no midget.

Whilst in real life I would be pleased to get a gallon sized bottle for what I thought I was going to be normal sized, in SL it is a dissappointment.  

 

 

The glass alone holds about a pint..The way she drinks it, it is a wonder she can stand up at all after a few minutes. hehe

---

Shop inworld. Pictures on the Marketplace can be deceiving

[Phil Deakins]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

I'm pretty sure that I did mention consistent sizing, at least once, in one long thread.

Phil participated in that thread too.

---

I know you did, I'm pretty sure one of the threads you started was in the list of ones I'd found too, lol. I also know Phil participated in some of the threads discussing consistent sizing being a concern (hence why I figured he was deliberately being obtuse just to argue, lol)

---

You posted a long list of threads, which would take a lot of reading, so would you be kind enough to post the link to the one where you say that you know I participated in a discussion about consistent sizing. I don't mind being mistaken. I only I said that I don't recall any, but if I did, then I'd appreciate seeing it. I'm actually wondering if there is a misunderstanding of terms here, and that you mean that I've discussed sizes, which I have.

[Coby Foden]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

Phil Deakins replied in blue:

 

I know that you are referring to room sizes (somebody new here might not know it). They go: "Darn, not possible to make any object RL size here, ufff... " :smileysad:

If anyone reads, then there is no confusion. What would you prefer? People saying that RL sized rooms and furniture are just fine, when they are not?

Well, we have already agreed, in one earlier very long discussion, that for avatar comfort, for ease of movement it is a good idea to make the interiors bigger than in RL. If the avatar is average RL height, and if the camera is located away from its default "sacred" location to a much better natural view position, then the interiors need not to be hugely larger than in RL, for comfort and ease of movement. However, if the camera is kept in the default location and the avatar is very tall then huge interiors are needed.

But, as you said, rooms do need to be larger, which results in larger furniture or it would look much too small for the room. As a furniture maker I've seen it and known it for years. As a result of that, avatars need to be larger too.

---

Phil, do you remember this discussion?

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Dimensions-Avatars-Content-some-thoughts/m-p/2185525#M126607

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

The idea of RL sizes in an empty SL would work in exactly the same way is it works in the current SL. Avatars and furniture would work just fine, but room sizes must be bigger than RL because of the way we see. So your

idea of having avatar and furniture sizes the same as RL, and having bigger rooms because of the way we see, would work just fine

. We've never been in disagreement about that.

---

As you see, you have agreed in earlier discussion that RL sized furniture and RL sized avatars work just fine. Now you're going back to your earlier claim that they don't work. Why is that, did you change your mind?

 

By the way, for your furniture, avatar needs to be 2.33 m [7 feet 7.7 inches] tall so that it looks the same in relation to your furniture as 1.79 m [5 feet 10.5 inches] tall avatar looks in relation to RL sized furniture. Naturally your furniture and the tall avatar need bigger room than RL sized avatar and RL sized furniture would need.

 

I'm totally convinced that these RL examples of spacious living rooms would work in SL very well when dimensioned exactly 1:1 (1 RLm = 1 SLm). RL sized sized avatar would work well in those environments. No issues whatsoever.

 

No need to enlarge the furniture, no need to enlarge the room, no need for bigger avatar. Works fine just as it is. :smileyhappy:

[Coby Foden]

You're wrong in so many points that I feel the need to reply. :smileywink:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

Phil replied in blue:

Coby replied in green:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Coby Foden wrote:

(Phil Deakins replied in blue):

Would there be any benefits if we used RL as a reference in content building? Surely there would be. There would no more guessing to what size to make a

chair, a table, a kitchen sink, a cabinet, a cup, a glass, a plate, etc

. You just measure the RL items and make them exactly to same size in SL, using 1 RLm = 1 SLm.

You know very well, from the thrads on that subject, that

the default camera position doesn't allow it

.

---

 

---

Phil you know very well that the "

sacred default camera setting

"

(what you refuse to touch because it is the default) :smileywink:

does not prevent anybody in any way from creating content in RL sizes. You can do it, and you

do know

it. Please stop confusing people by saying something what is not true. Thanks. :matte-motes-smile:

I didn't say that the camera position prevents RL sized content from being made. I said nothing like that. What the camera's default position doesn't allow is making everything in RL sizes - rooms specifically, and that causes furniture to be bigger, etc. It's not me who is confusing people, it's you who reply to me by changing what I said. That's confusing.

In effect you did say that the default camera setting prevents making RL sized objects because you replied to my post where I was telling about sizes of

objects

, not rooms. You are confusing people, not me. I'm not changing what you said. :smileyhappy:

I know that you are referring to room sizes (somebody new here might not know it). They go: "Darn, not possible to make any object RL size here, ufff... " :smileysad:

If anyone reads, then there is no confusion. What would you prefer? Me saying that RL sized rooms and furniture are just fine, when they are not?

What I prefer to say is that:

RL sized furniture + RL sized avatar + good camera location + spacious RL room work

perfectly in SL. No need at all to making

everything

bigger. Your idea that bigger works better is wrong.

Well, we have already agreed, in one earlier very long discussion, that for avatar comfort, for ease of movement it is a good idea to make the interiors bigger than in RL. If the avatar is average RL height, and if the camera is located away from its default "sacred" location to a much better natural view position, then the interiors need not to be hugely larger than in RL, for comfort and ease of movement. However, if the camera is kept in the default location and the avatar is very tall then huge interiors are needed.

But, as you said, rooms do need to be larger, which results in larger furniture or it would look much too small for the room. As a furniture maker I've seen it and known it for years. As a result of that, avatars need to be larger too.

Larger rooms do not result in that the furniture and avatars need to be bigger. That's your wrong thinking. You're so stuck in that thinking, result of the many years of making furniture for very tall avatars, that you seem to be incapable of thinking anything else.

The default camera position is no excuse for extra large content creation. We know that the camera is not locked in that position. Any content creator should be aware of it. Not knowing that it is not locked is no excuse either. Content creators should familiarize themselves with the platform well; especially those who sell content.

The default camera position is no reason to make

gigantic

houses, but it does mean that house contents end up being larger because houses are necessarily larger.

You are right - the cam position isn't locked, but what percentage of people change it? Content creators need to make content suitable for the most common, which is the default cam position. And I assure you that content creators are very well aware of it. That's why you don't see much RL-sized furniture. Just because the cam position can be changed, doesn't mean that most people change it.

If the avatar is RL sized it does not need so huge rooms as the very tall avatars will need. The result is that the RL sized avatar's house works well with RL sized furniture, there is no need to upsize them.

But as the content creators know the camera postion so well and know that it can be changed to better location, they should be an example to people. Make things to RL sizes, inform people how the content looks right. Make content modifiable, so that those who want to be giants can scale the content to suit them. It's rather silly to continue to support giant sizes for years and years.

You claim that large interiors need large furniture because RL sized furniture would look too small. That's a funny claim.

It's not a funny claim at all. You are just waffling now, presumably because you don't have any good argument against something you don't want to be true. I've been in the furniture making business for a lot of years, and I promise you that RL-sized furniture looks way too small in typical SL rooms in homes.

Your claim is funny. YOu have made content for very tall avatars for years and years. You have no experience at all how things would look with RL sized content. Yes, I'm sure that RL sized furniture would look rather small in the houses made for the very tall avatars, that we can agree. :smileyhappy:

Where I live we many large malls. These malls have large interior spaces where there are seats for people to rest their feet, there are many small cafeterias in the middle of the open areas, there are snack bars. Plenty of empty space all around. The ceiling is very high. All the furniture is normal standard size, same size what people have in their homes. Not a single very large, oversized piece of furniture is seen anywhere. And nobody complains "

Why the furniture is so small in this big place?

" For everybody everything looks normal in the scene.

We are talking about homes, not malls etc. You put an RL-sized sofa against a wall in a typical SL living room, and you'll see that it looks much too small and unrealistic for the room. It's no good arguing about it Coby. I've been in the business for years and I know.

Who said we are about homes? Why are you referring to typical SL living room? We know that there are lots of "typical" SL living rooms which are extremely large. We know that RL sized furniture looks small in those rooms. We are not arguing about it at all. We are discussing (at least I am) whether RL sized content and avatars work in SL or not. Your business experience has been making content for very tall avatars. That has nothing to do with RL sized content and avatars.

Normal size furniture works perfectly in RL in big spaces. Why do you feel that it wouldn't work in SL?

I didn't say it wouldn't work in the sort of large spaces that you mentioned. It doesn't work in homes. Please stop changing what we are discussing. Why do you change the object of the discussion? Are you hoping that, if you change it, you can win a point?

RL sized furniture works very well in SL homes when they are made for RL sized avatars. I'm not here "to win a point". I'm here to discuss that RL sized content works in SL. There's no compelling reason for gigantism.

To me, your feeling that way makes no sense at all. Is it just a thing what you have deeply instilled in your mind ('

it does not work

'), or what is it?

It's deeply ingrained in my mind due to my extensive experience of it. It doesn't matter if it makes sense to you or not. Unless I'm mistaken, you are one of the minority who want their avatar to be more or less RL sized, and for no apparent reason. It's a 'thing' with you - almost a principle.

It's funny that you often refer to 'minority'. Does it make your claim stronger as you feel to be in the 'majority'? There are many reasons to support RL sizing. It has been discussed over and over again. But you prefer to discard anything what is said in favour and about the benefits of RL sizing. It's not a 'thing' with me, it's not almost a principle. It's just a fact.

Content creators create for the majority if they can, because they want to sell to the majority, and they can with homes and furniture. In very recent times, there are more shorter avs than there used to be, and it would benefit content creators to cater for both, as I do in a small way. But the old avatar heights are still the majority as far as I know. Whenever I go to a place where there are plenty of avatars, I'm never noticably taller than the others, but there is the occasional avatar that is significantly and very noticably shorter than the rest. That's the RL-sized one.

I understand that lots of content creators do it for the income, it is natural to make content for major customer group. But this majority thing does not invalidate in any way what I have been saying here about RL sizes.

Being the majority does not mean that the majority is right. In SL the majority just has followed the wrong path, due to Linden Lab made mistake early in the beginnings of SL.

---

 

---

 

[Aethelwine]

 

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

Here I am with a 100l$ bottle of no Mod wine. I am 1.75m tall so no midget.

Whilst in real life I would be pleased to get a gallon sized bottle for what I thought I was going to be normal sized, in SL it is a dissappointment.  

 

 

The glass alone holds about a pint..The way she drinks it, it is a wonder she can stand up at all after a few minutes. hehe

---

Shop inworld. Pictures on the Marketplace can be deceiving

---

 

The marketplace picture was so different it looked like a totally different product. The wine glasses were a different shape for starters. Yesterday I got messaged by representative of the store saying I would get a discount off future purchases if I left a review. I guess I now know why it had five 5 star reviews.

I was just going to count it down to experience, but since they approached me to do a review I replied explaining my dissappointment. To their credit the sales rep sympathised and told me who I could complain to. Whilst I didn't bother looking later the product now does seem to be mod now. I can't be bothered though to get a replacement. I bought a much nicer bottle afterwards from elsewhere.

Whilst yes I agree it is best to shop in world. In this case it was a spontaneous " I have been waiting prop" and MP was my only option. As it was I got through 3 bottles of wine before friend who had kept me waiting joined me.

None of this is a big issue but I think the picture illustrates why builders building to a scale based on their perceptions of the scale they think people want and not a prim sized scale causes such huge confusion.

[Ted McGregor]

Coby                  Phil

[Phil Deakins]

---

TDD123 wrote:

Coby                  Phil

---

LOL. Note the smiles on both of their faces It's well known that I love Coby, and I totally refuse to fall out with her over a difference of opinion or three. To be honest, I think she only does it for my benefit, because she knows how I enjoy a good debate

Coby has replied to my latest posts quite extensively but I don't have time just now to even read her latest posts let alone reply to them, but I'll do it tomorrow.

[Coby Foden]

---

TDD123 wrote:

Coby                  Phil

---

 

 

:smileywink:

[Phil Deakins]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

None of this is a big issue but I think the picture illustrates why builders building to a scale based on their perceptions of the scale they think people want and not a prim sized scale causes such huge confusion.

---

Imo, the person who made that bottle of wine and the glasses you described, has no concept of the scale that people want. Either that or you are a very small avatar Most creators have a realistic idea of scale that suits the majority of avatars in SL.

[Ted McGregor]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

It's well known that I love Coby, .... To be honest, I think she only does it for my benefit, because she knows how I enjoy a good debate

... but I don't have time just now to even read her latest posts let alone reply to them, but I'll do it tomorrow.

 

 

---

Have a good night's sleep ...  :robotwink:

[Ted McGregor]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

---

TDD123 wrote:

Coby                  Phil

---

 

 

:smileywink:

---

 

:robotlol: