Jump to content
Alexa Linden

Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, Kitsune Shan said:

These are the default avatar UVs. These templates has been around since 2005...

And they have tied down some of the loose locations that cause mismatches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

And they have tied down some of the loose locations that cause mismatches.

Ok I will explain it easily.
Omega is not an UV, it's an unified scripted applier. The purpose of Omega it's to everyone follow the default OLD SL UVS so we would be able to wear all the skins on all the mesh bodies. Omega, with it's script, would send the texture to each body's secret channel since each body applier uses a different channel and way of setting the texture (hence why maitreya applier wont work on belleza body). So that's it, Omega is NOT an updated UV system because they only use the very old default templates for the system avatar. Omega it's only an applier that means to be universal. The problem is that mesh bodies does not completely followed the OLD SL UVS so the purpose of Omega being an unified and universal system was destroyed on the same day that they approved mesh bodies to be Omega compatible when they weren't compatible with the OLD SL UVS at all (as clear example, Bellezas).
They didn't modified anything on the UVs neither those templates. They took the old templates and simply added notes for reference. You can even see the creator of those OLD templates that uses the default SL UVs and the year (years before even mesh was an idea) when they were made. I really can't explain better or more simple, sorry, all I can say it's that Omega is not even an UV at all, just a script system of appliers.

For example, if mesh bodies were to follow the old SL UVs (or Omega ones since they are literally the same thing), we would be able to wear bake on mesh skins between all those bodies. And it may be that in certain cases may be possible depending on which body but very unlikely.

Edited by Kitsune Shan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, Kitsune Shan said:

The problem is that mesh bodies does not completely followed the OLD SL UVS so the purpose of Omega being an unified and universal system was destroyed on the same day that they approved mesh bodies to be Omega compatible when they weren't compatible with the OLD SL UVS at all (as clear example, Bellezas).

On 6/5/2019 at 12:27 PM, Kitsune Shan said:

For example, Bellezas doesn't even use the same textures for feet and hands so it's completely impossible.

Theresa Tennyson whispers, "Belleza junked their proprietary hand and foot mapping years ago because the skin makers refused to make appliers for them, because they wanted to largely re-use their skins which were based on the default UV map."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

 

Theresa Tennyson whispers, "Belleza junked their proprietary hand and foot mapping years ago because the skin makers refused to make appliers for them, because they wanted to largely re-use their skins which were based on the default UV map."

I wasn't talking about hands and feet but the fact that others parts of the body does not fit properly. Stretched nipples anyone? :D
Anyway I am not here to discuss about your lack of knowledge on the matter but about missing and broken features on Bake On Mesh. I couldn't care less about the rest of mesh bodies UVs, I simply want Bake On Mesh to work properly as it should and include all required features from the past system skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kitsune Shan said:

I wasn't talking about hands and feet but the fact that others parts of the body does not fit properly. Stretched nipples anyone? :D
Anyway I am not here to discuss about your lack of knowledge on the matter but about missing and broken features on Bake On Mesh. I couldn't care less about the rest of mesh bodies UVs, I simply want Bake On Mesh to work properly as it should and include all required features from the past system skin.

I'm sorry, I got confused because you said you were talking about hands and feet in so many words. And incidentally, old Belleza skins (i.e. the old generation that Belleza never made appliers for) work beautifully on new mesh bodies using Bakes on Mesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I wonder if there will be any big news at tomorrows creator meetup 👀

BoM's been sitting in RC for a good month now

Edited by Digit Gears

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Digit Gears said:

I wonder if there will be any big news at tomorrows creator meetup 👀

BoM's been sitting in RC for a good month now

Same here.

I'm going to ask "and BoM?" if no one talk about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anything changed with BoM? I tried it one time only because I thought I missed my 'old' skin and shape that was until I put it on my lelutka head and slink body. It looked terrible. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ananoelle said:

Has anything changed with BoM? I tried it one time only because I thought I missed my 'old' skin and shape that was until I put it on my lelutka head and slink body. It looked terrible. 

It's going to be barely better than a non-starter. Because each "layer" has to conform to the UV map of the mesh you're wearing, there are far too many different products from different creators to make any third-party creators go "Ummm, I don't think so". 

I don't foresee it taking off any time soon after release. It may be a slow-burner thing like Scultpys were, perhaps.

Just my opinion based on what the general promise (as in potential) was and what the reality is. I see it as EPICFLOP unless the creators can find a way to make it feasibly useful in a meaningful way.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

I see it as EPICFLOP unless the creators can find a way to make it feasibly useful in a meaningful way.

Less reliance on Alpha Huds since we'll be able to use alpha layers again.

Peeps won't have to fuss over applier stuff as much anymore, so for base body stuff from extra skin effects, tattoos, and even undergarments can be simple layers again baked on the base instead of needing 20 different overlaying onions. Even form fitting clothing can adapt to clothing layers.

That's just a few things off the top of my head.

Edited by Digit Gears
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Digit Gears said:

Less reliance on Alpha Huds since we'll be able to use alpha layers again.

Peeps won't have to fuss over applier stuff as much anymore, so for base body stuff from extra skin effects, tattoos, and even undergarments can be simple layers again baked on the base instead of needing 20 different overlaying onions. Even form fitting clothing can adapt to clothing layers.

That's just a few things off the top of my head.

Perhaps. though I prefer to create my own auto-alpha because some creators are not so attention-to-detail oriented. I prefer the control. As for the rest: again: they will have to be created for each specific body: So, Tattoo "layer" for Maitreya, Belleza, Slink... what about the brand I love that isn't listed? Now it's not just mesh vertex weaighting, now it's testure manipulation, which can be just as challenging depending on the UV map design and how the modelers placed their unwrapping seams.

Like I said, it will likely be a slow-burn in terms of adoption as I don;t foresee *anyone* retroactively refitting anything already created; only new creations will support it. This is just my own prediction based on my own hypothesis and experience of technologies past. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Alyona Su said:

now it's testure manipulation, which can be just as challenging depending on the UV map design and how the modelers placed their unwrapping seams.

Those who have been making appliers for any of the mesh bodies have been doing texture manipulation since the first mesh bodies were introduced. I have always had to tweak my seamed hosiery to be sure the seams matched, so much so that I gave up and only make for one brand now unless the hosiery is seamless in which case it doesn't matter as much. I don't see how this is any implication that BoM won't be adopted. We will continue as before with designating which brand of mesh body our system layers work with just as we have with our appliers.

There are many, many reasons for adopting BoM and quickly as it will improve the functionality of mesh bodies. Specifically improving the issues with alpha glitching, providing the ability to use up to 62 layers at one time, not to mention, that with custom system alphas we will finally not have to rely on alpha cuts when it comes to creating necklines. I fear that those who drag their feet in adopting BoM will find it a big mistake with financial consequences.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Alyona Su said:

Perhaps. though I prefer to create my own auto-alpha because some creators are not so attention-to-detail oriented. I prefer the control. As for the rest: again: they will have to be created for each specific body: So, Tattoo "layer" for Maitreya, Belleza, Slink... what about the brand I love that isn't listed? Now it's not just mesh vertex weaighting, now it's testure manipulation, which can be just as challenging depending on the UV map design and how the modelers placed their unwrapping seams.

Like I said, it will likely be a slow-burn in terms of adoption as I don;t foresee *anyone* retroactively refitting anything already created; only new creations will support it. This is just my own prediction based on my own hypothesis and experience of technologies past. :)

The popular mesh bodies use UV maps that are probably 99% the same as the default avatar except for the hands and feet. The differences are small variations in nipples, navel position, etc. If they weren't so similar Omega appliers wouldn't work at all. Any pixel manipulation that's necessary is already being done for the textures in appliers - new skins for Bakes-on-Mesh will use exactly the same textures as the appliers. Meanwhile, things like tattoos are generally one-size-fits all - the differences aren't in the textures but in the scripting of the appliers.

Edited by Theresa Tennyson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually prefer alpha HUD to old style alphas myself. Having to wear one full body alpha made it a lot easier for me than finding whatever alpha was needed for top, pants, hair and so on. I also suspect that auto-alpha functionality won't go anywhere, because people already got used to it so much, I doubt any clothing (those who used it all the time) or mesh body creators will kill this functionality. It's a lot more convenient "wear and forget", than "wear, find a matching alpha, don't forget to add it instead of "wear" " for an average user. I personally can't stand it, because if region is slow or attachments just put in wrong order (when I attach a few together, in case when I switch full outfits), then I have to fix it manually anyway... each time, but that is mostly because of no-mod clothes so I can't kill scripts in them.

Also mesh body/head HUDs come with save slots (I wish they had more, though) for skins, alphas and layer appliers, so instead of looking for an applier in the inventory, I can quickly attach one hud from favorite wearables and change what I need in a couple of clicks. Dragging appliers/layers to the same favorite wearables works too, but in my opinion it can't have too many items in it and remain useful, since whole point of it is quick access and if I'll have like 30 makeups there, 15 body appliers, maybe some tattoos on top of what is already there... it will be like a mini inventory I have to carefully check each time, may as well open full inventory and find folder with them then.

Then there are material enabled appliers and appliers (some catsuits for example) that look better on a clothing layer because of the 3D-like effect. BoM won't have materials as far as I know. So I'm pretty sure mesh body creators won't fully remove layers, maybe will reduce layers to 1-2 instead. Or there will be 2 body versions, one with layers and one without. Which is a good compromise I suppose, at least for those who don't mind to switch bodies for different needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The popular mesh bodies use UV maps that are probably 99% the same as the default avatar except for the hands and feet. The differences are small variations in nipples, navel position, etc. If they weren't so similar Omega appliers wouldn't work at all. Any pixel manipulation that's necessary is already being done for the textures in appliers - new skins for Bakes-on-Mesh will use exactly the same textures as the appliers. Meanwhile, things like tattoos are generally one-size-fits all - the differences aren't in the textures but in the scripting of the appliers.

See... this is what I fugred originally. I am getting mixed messages here. LOL As I've said before, I'll just take a wait-and-see approach and just not hold my breath over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Meanwhile, things like tattoos are generally one-size-fits all - the differences aren't in the textures but in the scripting of the appliers.

If you mean on tattoos, yes, they kinda work due their nature but they do still have the same differences on the UVs just it's easier to fit a tattoo of certain features over a similar UV than a whole skin. But no, the difference isn't on the scripts but the UVs of each body. They have relatively similar UVs trying to emulate the default ones but they do not get the exact values btween them that's why it's pretty hard for them to use old skins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure this has been asked yes, and please accept my apology for not reading through the 31 pages of replies to this topic..... I did try to search for keywords before askin.

How will Bakes On Mesh affect things like non-human avatars?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

See... this is what I fugred originally. I am getting mixed messages here. LOL As I've said before, I'll just take a wait-and-see approach and just not hold my breath over it.

Think of it like maps of geographic locations. If you look at maps of the same location made by different companies, they're not going to be absolutely identical. Text is going to be in different places and different sizes, colors are going to be different, etc. And depending on when the map was made, some of the geographical details might be different - an old map won't show a road made after it was printed; a street name might have been changed; a rest stop might have been closed. I have a 1958 road atlas for interest's sake but I don't use it for everyday navigation. However, all these maps will be extremely similar because they're all mapping the same place. A mountain isn't going to move fifty miles, because that's where it is and it's not moving at a rate anyone other than a geologist will be able to detect.

With the currently popular mesh bodies and heads it's the same situation but in reverse, because the "paper" map - the Second Life skin - existed before the physical(ish) object that it "maps." The bodies were made to the map instead of the other way around. They didn't have to - Aesthetic did things completely differently, for instance. However, most mesh body makers realized that the Second Life skin industry wouldn't jump to support a completely different layout. Yes, technically speaking the exact layout of where the vertexes of each polygon fall on the skin texture will be different and that may create oddities, especially because the bodies are more detailed than the Second Life body. A nipple location might be different; an arm location won't be. As far as the edges lining up, etc.? I should point out that a lot of the old system clothing didn't line up perfectly at edges on the default avatar either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GarouGrey said:

I'm not sure this has been asked yes, and please accept my apology for not reading through the 31 pages of replies to this topic..... I did try to search for keywords before askin.

How will Bakes On Mesh affect things like non-human avatars?

Jump back to page 28 for discussion and examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya know,  the one thing I cannot understand is, if we can now make applier clothing for mesh bodies using the same old body template that came out way way back when before mesh back when we only had the SL avatar to work with,  and the clothing we make now using  same templates plus  the mesh body makers applier kit, fits.  Then why is there going to be such a big issue with bakes on mesh?  My understanding is that BOM would eliminate the need to make a load of appliers for each body.. But it seems this will not be the case, so what is it going to be good for?  Or does this mapping thing only affect skins?  I was pretty excited about BOM when I first heard about it because some of my fashion designs use both mesh and layers using appliers.. i.e.  a longer mesh top that won't fit nicely over mesh pants without the pants poking through the mesh top..i.e. a sweatshirt over jeans... so I would make the mesh top and applier jeans .. poking problem solved.. So I was looking forward to BOM to eliminate all those dang appliers.. But from what I have read in here so far, this is not going to fix that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:

Ya know,  the one thing I cannot understand is, if we can now make applier clothing for mesh bodies using the same old body template that came out way way back when before mesh back when we only had the SL avatar to work with,  and the clothing we make now using  same templates plus  the mesh body makers applier kit, fits.  Then why is there going to be such a big issue with bakes on mesh?  My understanding is that BOM would eliminate the need to make a load of appliers for each body.. But it seems this will not be the case, so what is it going to be good for?  Or does this mapping thing only affect skins?  I was pretty excited about BOM when I first heard about it because some of my fashion designs use both mesh and layers using appliers.. i.e.  a longer mesh top that won't fit nicely over mesh pants without the pants poking through the mesh top..i.e. a sweatshirt over jeans... so I would make the mesh top and applier jeans .. poking problem solved.. So I was looking forward to BOM to eliminate all those dang appliers.. But from what I have read in here so far, this is not going to fix that.

Typically it only affects things that go on the skin and must line up with the various "bits", but in some instances if can be a problem with clothing. For instance, with my seamed hosiery getting the seam to match at the ankle and onto the foot is extremely difficult for some of the bodies. That would also apply in situations where you might have a problem matching up patterns with clothing. For instance, if you're going to make a pair of plaid pants and want the pattern to match exactly on the side seams. It might match on some of the bodies but not all of the bodies. That issue exists today and BoM is no magic cure for this type of problem. BoM wasn't envisioned to fix these types of issues. It's not the purpose.

Edited by Blush Bravin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:

Ya know,  the one thing I cannot understand is, if we can now make applier clothing for mesh bodies using the same old body template that came out way way back when before mesh back when we only had the SL avatar to work with,  and the clothing we make now using  same templates plus  the mesh body makers applier kit, fits.  Then why is there going to be such a big issue with bakes on mesh?  My understanding is that BOM would eliminate the need to make a load of appliers for each body.. But it seems this will not be the case, so what is it going to be good for?  Or does this mapping thing only affect skins?  I was pretty excited about BOM when I first heard about it because some of my fashion designs use both mesh and layers using appliers.. i.e.  a longer mesh top that won't fit nicely over mesh pants without the pants poking through the mesh top..i.e. a sweatshirt over jeans... so I would make the mesh top and applier jeans .. poking problem solved.. So I was looking forward to BOM to eliminate all those dang appliers.. But from what I have read in here so far, this is not going to fix that.

If a texture works on a mesh body when put on it with an applier, it will work exactly the same way when its put on with system layers because it's the same texture on the same body.

An issue with system/applier clothing and Bakes on Mesh is that the skin and clothing all appear on the same layer instead of clothing floating slightly above the way it does with "onion" layers, and if the base layer is used for the bake things like nipples will appear 3-dimensional. There's no technical reason why the baked texture can't be applied on a clothing layer instead of directly on the body though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:

But it seems this will not be the case, so what is it going to be good for?

that is true, believe me we will see one bakes optimized skin per body option from skin designers worth their salt, however it will have some benefits:

  • no more battling alphas (see your tattoo below your lace lingerie/wet tshirt)
  • combine tattoos and makeup
  • no more flickering tattoos at high altitudes

and last not least:

  • freedom to choose to look crap again with old system cloth :D
33 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:

Or does this mapping thing only affect skins?

No it affects everything... but tattoos and system cloth don't instantly look crap. Most of them are designed in ways that they won't be affected by this. They can however, critical areas are body folds and 3d elements like nipples and bellybottons... A pair of pants with the fold shades painted in another place than they appear on your body will not look well - as would a misplaced belly button circling tattoo. It is even worse with heads. Nostrils shades painted below your nose will make you really look creepy.

Edited by Fionalein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

There's no technical reason why the baked texture can't be applied on a clothing layer instead of directly on the body though.

I think you missed a critical step - wouldn't the skin also be painted on the outer layer then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...