So You Make "100% Original Mesh", Do You?

[Codex Alpha]

I've seen groups like these, and even individuals who sport this sort of badge on their products, and even belong to groups regarding this.

What exactly is an 'original mesh'?

I consider an original mesh to be a piece that is concepted by, modeled by, and presented by the artist himself, albeit 'their' style and finished piece inspired by everything around them and their life experience.

However, these individuals and groups seem to want to apply "100% original mesh" to mesh pieces that simply replicate already existing products from the real-world, some even going so far as to put the actual brand names on the textures for the objects they create...

Considering it is very easy for a '3D Artist' to simple 'trace' from a photograph, or even model directly from it.. where is the actual orginality?

One day I opened up Illustrator and 'traced' a snapshot of my avatar, in a pose from in-game that I did not create myself, and saved the resultant product as a 'work'. Is it really original? Well the avatar design might be, the clothes I chose (even those aren't mine either)... Is the resultant vector file and 'original work', or just a reproduction into vector form of an existing artwork?

The difference is, I wouldn't present it as an 'original work'.

The awesome thing about SL, and the VALUE one offers to users of it will be, will be in your creativity  in presenting an object. There are more than enough crates, barrels and park benches out there - one would think why bother modeling those again?

Now modeling a park bench out of metal plumbing pipes, welded onto bicycle frames at either end, concepted (through sketches and scribblings) by the artist themselves, then modeled to that, could certainly qualify as "100% original mesh". I prefer using 'unique design' or 'innovative design' rather than '100% original" because as an artist, I am the sum of all the sights, sounds and experiences in my life, and everything goes into a big pot, gets stirred and churned and matured, and comes out in the form of a mental library in which I can create new works.

Going to the IKEA catalogue and replicating all the trendy furniture in it, uploading the model and textures (sometimes with a brand name or gaming the system using brand-like names), then claiming it is an 'original mesh".. well that's a pretty loose definition...

Perhaps instead of using 'badges' or icons or claims in your listings and telling us how original you are...

How about SHOW us.

Have a good day, hope you're inspired to go that one (or two) extra steps in your creations.

PS. Other thoughts:

Do most consumers care about creativity and originality? Or do they want products in VR that may not be able to get in RL?

What's the line drawn when it comes to claiming work as your own or 'original' anyway?

[callistanull]

I interpret it as the creator making the mesh model themself in their 3D program of choice, without parts purchased on 3D model sites or full perm kits on SL.

40 minutes ago, entity0x said:

The awesome thing about SL, and the VALUE one offers to users of it will be, will be in your creativity  in presenting an object.

That's part of it, not all of it. Quality matters too.

There's a lot more to a mesh than what it looks like at high LOD: two of the same type of item, with similar or even identical appearance with identical textures, might behave differently. Badly done mesh takes longer to download and render, because your CPU and graphics card still have to deal with the extra 500 vertices you can't see. Often the pair won't have the same LI. Different lower LOD models make them look different when you step back, and the quality of physics varies. Bottom line is there's more work involved than making a table look like a particular kind of table.

Original doesn't necessarily mean it's better, but it does mean it's unique "under the hood," since nobody is going to create a vertex-by-vertex identical item by chance on anything much more complex than a mesh version of a prim.

Edited January 10, 2019 by callistanull
clarification

[Alyona Su]

28 minutes ago, callistanull said:

interpret it as the creator making the mesh model themself in their 3D program of choice, without parts purchased on 3D model sites or full perm kits on SL.

I interpret the same ways, EXCEPT - I interpret that they UPLOADED the mesh themselves and that it's not a FP kit. There are a lot of resale places where people can buy mesh models outside of SL. So when they say "original" - I believe they mean "original uploaded". If they actually modeled it themselves then I believe they *will* mention that specifically in their advertisement.

[Chic Aeon]

I generally agree with the OP.  That being said, most folks that I know (including me) use "original mesh" to mean that the modeling was done by the person selling the item, not purchased as a template asset or downloaded from a website. 

So I have no problem with that terminology when used in that manner.   

 

Those very nice looking models shown -- whether traditional or creatively designed look too dense for a game asset though. That also figures into the mix.   Quite a few of us have started putting the tris count of an asset into the store listings (this is Sansar but maybe folks are doing it here also).  In sansar it is more about tris than land impact as that isn't figured there.    Either way, I think having the actual "cost" of the item readily available on the Marketplace listing would be good.

I also have no issue with template creations (either decor or clothing) as they have a place in the community also.  IMO.

 

 

[Tamara Artis]

Well I guess there will always be certain amount of people who don't care about the original content - in SL they produce/buy exact copies of real life products that often have the brand names spelled a bit different and in RL they buy fakes. Nothing we say or do will make them change, I don't support or defend them but I don't know how to fight them except by not giving them exposure, at all. 

Is this only about mesh creators in SL or is it concerning other products and places? Originality is, IMO, not that simple. I can't copy my own work, it turns out different every time... If we take originality as something no one ever created, then tons of products we use every day aren't original... 

If we want to go deeper into discussion about the originality we could discuss influences and how in RL same as SL you often see how certain designs have their own clear influences, is this okay? Or we have songs and movie remakes, is that okay? It's not original content, but an old one created a bit differently. 

I don't know how to create mesh, have only few hours a day of free time and I always have to chose which thing has priority, as much as I would like to learn this, I simply don't have the luxury of taking few hours of my time so I buy full perm mesh and put my poses inside. Poses are created using real life photos because I want them to look realistic and photos serve as a reference. Could you call me an original creator or am I just reproducing an old content? In the last round of the event I participate, one of the products I had were stairs where your avi sits one them in various poses. In this round another creator had that same stairs but she has couple poses, so is that an original work or reproduction of already reproduced work? 

Where is the line? Sorry, it seems I went too far into philosophy lol

[steeljane42]

3 hours ago, entity0x said:

PS. Other thoughts:

Do most consumers care about creativity and originality? Or do they want products in VR that may not be able to get in RL?

As a consumer (not a creator myself, but I do shop a lot) I can try to answer this at least. But tt depends on what it is and my needs, so kinda hard to give a simple answer.

Creativity and originality is a good thing, but sometimes less creativity is better too, as long as it's done right. If use some leather pants as an example: sometimes I just want a quality made leather pants, well fitted, with materials and good textures, but simple, pretty much based on plain leather pants you could find in RL. In that case additional creativity and millions of zippers, cuts, fancy pockets and buttons are "bad", because I want simplicity. That's actually very common problem for me in SL's shopping, some creators overdo with bells and whistles and quality stuff that I'd get for sure, just ends up looking cartoon-ish in my opinion (although I imagine there's other kind of people who appreciate that). Same is valid for some furniture. Like for the library room at my place, it was pretty difficult to find quality and simple/classic furniture that would me modeled after RL examples. I had no need in crazy/fancy designs for that purpose.

And sometimes more fantasy/creativity and originality is awesome. I recently felt like making a few sci-fi outfits and that's where I appreciate creativity a lot. The more unique the better. I also have a steampunk room at my place that is filled with steampunk stuff (duh) and I did try to choose most original and interesting decor/furniture for that as long as it did match the rest, so it was interesting to search/shop for it and see all unique and crazy ideas people have.

I agree on what others said about "original mesh" label as well, too. Wonder how honest some of those "SLOCCA mesh" and similar labels are, though. FP templates are quite easy to find out, be it clothes or furniture. Even if people reupload them under their name so it's impossible to check linked set and see the original creator, they are still there on the MP and in other people's items, under different names and with slightly different textures, but still very obvious. But in case when someone buys or just grabs 3D stuff from random sites... that's much more difficult to find out and often leads to some drama from what I've seen in SL related blogs/sites, where people accuse certain brands in just using others' work.

[Fionalein]

OP has a pretty different view of original than I do. Take a look at his two guitar amps and his nixie toaster example. The first is clearly a marshall design and not very original, I agree. But already the second does not look very functional and the toaster might only be able to work in a Tim Burton movie but would never survive stage wear and tear...

If I want a virtual item that emulates a RL item I want one that I would buy IRL too. Sure this limits the creativity, but so do RL restraints. Staying in the genre, those "axe" designs look way more metal than the superstrats - still superstrats dominate among metal musicians... why? Because they are functional.

Edited January 10, 2019 by Fionalein

[Bebe Bunny]

I like creative different products but I also like the real life alternatives when I want a more realistic decoration. I do believe creators could try and adapt items to be less like what they got inspiration from but not to a point where it's not identifiable as a certain product.

Using the example given, third one is nice but I'd only use it for a steampunk kind of scenery, if I wanted to set up a realistic stage for a band, I'd rather use one of the first two.

[Sasy Scarborough]

As said above, the groups and the like are only relating to made by them, uploaded by them and usually sold by them. So that it cancelled out the template sellers etc, it was something that started with Slocca, when it was harder for the people that were learning and creating mesh content to compete with these perfect items sellers when mesh was in its infancy.

As far as wanting original design, you will find very limited numbers of the kind of artists and imaginarians it would take to create shops full of original content in that way. If someone was able to create truly unique and stunning footwear for instance, we would hope they would take that gift to RL and make hundreds of dollars a shoe not lindens, the same with original designs of clothing etc. Architecture is also very complicated training and even carpenters and people that work with real tools etc, often replicate something already existing. Someone wants an armoir other than again being an artist, there are only so many ways to produce something viable for the customer. I used to sell handmade furniture, the truly creative pieces sat there, the generic based off of years of sameness rolled off the floor. 

As also stated things that visually 'work' are what people want and while it is a fine line with copyright and so on, they also want the status or recognisability that goes with things being identical to RL. If I want to kit out a laundry in my home I want things that look like proper washing machine and dryer, instantly recognisable as such. If someone forms an SL rock band, while I am completely without any knowledge in that area, a musician or a fan of music is not going to want to put some silly imagined amp on their stage with kooky looking instruments, they are going to want to rock out with the best and even have the ooos and aaaaahs of the people that know, impressed that they are using ___________ guitars or _________ keyboards. 

I believe in enhancing very much so, when I see a replication of a dress for instance I do often wonder why that strap was not moved, or removed, or why that wasn't done ten different ways to make it not the same as that dress in vogue, but the creator wanted it to be that dress in vogue, wanted the customers they create for to be able to feel as special in SL as they may never get to in RL in that dress from Vogue. 

I love the creative geniuses we have in SL especially the artwork it is why my RL tote bags and my RL doona cover are both adorned with artwork by Nylon Pinkney YAY For Society 6 making that possible. 

Original content is only ever going to mean made by, not designed by, because unfortunately if truly a work of the creators imagination, the masses will never know unless it is very well communicated and unfortunately more so, it would then encourage some to seek out as much as they could to disprove it. 

 

ADDED: about the shoes, even shoes are replications of other peoples designs, a maryjane style shoe by Louboutin is not his design, maryjanes as a style are older than him making footwear, he just made his version. Most fashion comes back every twenty years, balloon skirts were around decades before we thought we invented them in the 80's

Edited January 10, 2019 by Sasy Scarborough

[Blush Bravin]

Maybe I'm in the minority, but when I see 100% original mesh to me it means the creator modeled the mesh. They didn't use a template. They didn't buy the mesh model from a website and then upload to SL. If the label said 100% original creation then perhaps I would think that the artist didn't use any source material for inspiration. That the total creation came from the imagination of the creator. 

When I'm shopping for mesh, I want to see how quickly an item rezzes. I want to check if the object has way more geometry than it should. I look to see if the item uses normal maps to get the details rather than geometry. Basically I want mesh that is functional and out of the ordinary. Do I care if the creator modeled the item after something found at Ikea? Nope, I don't care one bit. Now if I find the basic same item in nearly every store I shop at I'm not likely to buy it, why? Because it's ordinary not because I question if the mesh is original. But there's one thing I've noticed. Those models people buy from mesh model websites usually aren't optimized. It's a dead giveaway that the model was not made for SL. So I tend to think when I see something like that that it's not 100% original mesh. Again, the reason I'm not buying is because the complexity of the model is just too high for SL. 

Looking at those three objects you used to demonstrate your argument, I'm guessing they are speakers of some sort. I'm not familiar with them. But, I definitely would NOT buy the third one because it's obvious it hasn't been optimized for gaming. So then I'm left with the two remaining. To be honest, I like the clean lines of the first over the second. So, I'm more likely to buy the first one. 

[Pamela Galli]

42 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Maybe I'm in the minority, but when I see 100% original mesh to me it means the creator modeled the mesh. They didn't use a template. They didn't buy the mesh model from a website and then upload to SL.

No pretty much everyone but entity thinks that. He just drops by periodically to ride his hobby horses, of which this is one.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Pamela Galli

[Chic Aeon]

50 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Maybe I'm in the minority, but when I see 100% original mesh to me it means the creator modeled the mesh. They didn't use a template. They didn't buy the mesh model from a website and then upload to SL. If the label said 100% original creation then perhaps I would think that the artist didn't use any source material for inspiration. That the total creation came from the imagination of the creator. 

When I'm shopping for mesh, I want to see how quickly an item rezzes. I want to check if the object has way more geometry than it should. I look to see if the item uses normal maps to get the details rather than geometry. Basically I want mesh that is functional and out of the ordinary. Do I care if the creator modeled the item after something found at Ikea? Nope, I don't care one bit. Now if I find the basic same item in nearly every store I shop at I'm not likely to buy it, why? Because it's ordinary not because I question if the mesh is original. But there's one thing I've noticed. Those models people buy from mesh model websites usually aren't optimized. It's a dead giveaway that the model was not made for SL. So I tend to think when I see something like that that it's not 100% original mesh. Again, the reason I'm not buying is because the complexity of the model is just too high for SL. 

Looking at those three objects you used to demonstrate your argument, I'm guessing they are speakers of some sort. I'm not familiar with them. But, I definitely would NOT buy the third one because it's obvious it hasn't been optimized for gaming. So then I'm left with the two remaining. To be honest, I like the clean lines of the first over the second. So, I'm more likely to buy the first one. 

Not surprisingly I pretty much agree with all you have said --- except that I seldom use normal maps in SL because they can change SO VERY DRASTICALLY and look really horrible depending on Windlight settings. I use them all the time in Sansar where they seem to work a lot better -- AND of course we have control over our own experience lighting.

That heavy mesh thing is an issue and while I have been spouting "optimization" and "game asset" philosophy for a long while here, it seems that the problem is getting worse and not better.   In the beginning I thought that it was just the creators (mostly well-known ones) were just not paying attention.

Now it has come to light -- a few times -- that what was being sold as original mesh was indeed downloaded.  I have to say that comparing works of creators say two years ago and the same creator's work now (closely looking at the triangles) that I am not seeing any kind of segue from "then" to "now" and that bothers me. Lot of the best selling and most popular mesh is definitely NOT game asset mesh. 

As you say, the way something will WORK is definitely important.  I can deal with heavy mesh as my computer is pretty hefty but I can't put heavy mesh at LEA6 and still have an OPTIMIZED experience for everyone.  I am sure there are a few nasty heavy things around and about there. I wish we had the same "density" tool as in Sansar and I could find them easily and delete them. I guess wireframe and camming would do the same thing, just not as easily. 

So, personally I have a couple of worries happening for me now -- the steady increase in the density of mesh (this from some of my personal favorite creators with some venturing over just these last six months) AND selling downloaded assets as Original. As far as I can tell, downloaded assets with the correct licenses are now legal in SL (mostly because they are in Sansar and we have the same LL TOS -- or did for awhile).  Still, MORALLY it is an issue -- maybe just for me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Chic Aeon
spelling

[Blush Bravin]

10 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

Not surprisingly I pretty much agree with all you have said --- except that I seldom use normal maps in SL because they can change SO VERY DRASTICALLY and look really horrible depending on Windlight settings. I use them all the time in Sansar where they seem to work a lot better -- AND of course we have control over our own experience lighting.

I use normal maps quite a bit in SL as well as Sansar. In Sansar I can get quite heavy handed in making my normal maps because PBR rendering is wonderful in rendering those maps. Here in SL I have to be very careful to be sure the maps produce subtle effects. Plus I know that some of my customers don't use ALM so for them they won't see the effects of a normal map anyway, so I try to make my products look good with or without the normal map. Also, I think I'm probably the only person alive who uses Gimp and not Blender or Substance or one of those other programs to make normal maps.

 

14 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

As far as I can tell, downloaded assets with the correct licenses are now legal in SL (mostly because they are in Sansar and we have the same LL TOS -- or did for awhile). 

I thought the issue wasn't with the LL TOS but the licenses from those sites exclude selling on any open-source platform because theft is so prevalent. As an example, I believe TurboSquid prohibits selling in SL but is fine with Sansar. I could be misinformed though. 

[Fionalein]

12 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

I thought the issue wasn't with the LL TOS but the licenses from those sites exclude selling on any open-source platform because theft is so prevalent. As an example, I believe TurboSquid prohibits selling in SL but is fine with Sansar. I could be misinformed though. 

Didn't Turboquid just list SL as an example for "open worlds" ? I bet it is forbidden in Sansar too when you ask them...

[Blush Bravin]

3 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

Didn't Turboquid just list SL as an example for "open worlds" ? I bet it is forbidden in Sansar too when you ask them...

Sansar is not open source. Not only is it not forbidden they actually have their own store front in Sansar. 

[Fionalein]

open world != open source

 

pretty sure this covers Sansar - of course Turbosquid can just do an preemptive strike and offer stuff themselves...

• Using TurboSquid products in Virtual Worlds.
  This use is prohibited if the virtual world-type is an open MMO, like Second Life. However, the use is allowed if the MMO is a closed MMO, like World of Warcraft. More specifically, the 3D model may not be exported or sold

Edited January 11, 2019 by Fionalein

[Chic Aeon]

27 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

I thought the issue wasn't with the LL TOS but the licenses from those sites exclude selling on any open-source platform because theft is so prevalent. As an example, I believe TurboSquid prohibits selling in SL but is fine with Sansar. I could be misinformed though. 

For awhile it was both.  Edit: Hence my comment about licensing :D. 

 

And I use Shadermap 4 and STILL (in Sansar) go very lightly. I personally am not all that fond of the "normal map" look.  

Edited January 11, 2019 by Chic Aeon

[Blush Bravin]

8 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

open world != open source 

• Using TurboSquid products in Virtual Worlds.
  This use is prohibited if the virtual world-type is an open MMO, like Second Life. However, the use is allowed if the MMO is a closed MMO, like World of Warcraft. More specifically, the 3D model may not be exported or sold.

As I've tried to state .. SL is open and Sansar is closed. I'm not sure what you're getting at. And I gave an example of how they even have a store front in Sansar. So you're confusing me.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Blush Bravin

[Chic Aeon]

There was a time --- 2013 when the TOS said that NO ONE could UPLOAD ANYTHING that wasn't totally made by them or that they had full copyright (not use) ---  even creative commons attrib would not have been covered. MUCH ado about it all. I was on TV about it along with some others including lawyers. There were worse things than that in the TOS back then and I only uploaded ONE TEXTURE FOR LEA7 in eight months.  I created in Opensim (which of course has OTHER issues LOL but I was not a happy gal).  

I have a page (now non-public but still there) on my blog about it all if you want to research. Oh so many links. Now of course that is old news and we have very different rules (or lack of thereof).  

 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Chic Aeon
spelling

[Fionalein]

17 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Not only is it not forbidden they actually have their own store front in Sansar. 

What kind of silly argument is that? Buying from Turbosquid in Sansar store under Sansar license does not in any case affect your purchases in Turbosquid store under Turbosquid license and vice versa ...

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Fionalein

[Blush Bravin]

14 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

What kind of silly argument is that? Buying from Turbosquid in Sansar store under Sansar license does not in any case affect your purchases in Turbosquid store under Turbosquid licese and vice versa ...

 

Do you see TurboSquid selling in SL? No, because it's prohibited. Creators in Sansar have bought models directly from TurboSquid. They use them in their experiences. I've seen some make modifications and sell them in the store as well. *** added: Those that were modded and sold may have been the ones that got removed. I've never bought anything from Turbo so haven't really paid attention to their licensing other than to hear the explanation of why you can use Turbo in Sansar and can't in SL. The explanation was that SL is open and Sansar is closed. Now I'm done. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Blush Bravin
added content

[Chic Aeon]

3 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

What kind of silly argument is that? Buying from Turbosquid in Sansar store under Sansar license does not in any case affect your purchases in Turbosquid store under Turbosquid license and vice versa ...

 

What I find odd about the Turbosquid thing is the towards the beginning of Sansar Ebbe gave demos showing the Golden Gate Bridge that was downloaded for Turbosquid (and stated as such). While I don't know if that bridge is still in Sansar's over 1,000 experiences it seems odd to me.    

Not arguing and likely I could look up if I wanted :D but still -- pretty strange. 

[Blush Bravin]

6 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

There was a time --- 2013 when the TOS said that NO ONE could UPLOAD ANYTHING that wasn't totally made by them or that they had full copyright (not use) ---  even creative commons attrib would not have been covered. MUCH ado about it all. I was on TV about it along with some others including lawyers. There were worse things than that in the TOS back then and I only uploaded ONE TEXTURE FOR LEA7 in eight months.  I created in Opensim (which of course has OTHER issues LOL but I was not a happy gal).  

I have a page (now non-public but still there) on my blog about it all if you want to research. Oh so many links. Now of course that is old news and we have very different rules (or lack of thereof).  

 

 

 

I wasn't making any mesh back in those days so didn't pay attention. Most of my knowledge about mesh has occurred in the last two years. I just learned Blender when Bento hit the grid.

[Blush Bravin]

 

47 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

While I don't know if that bridge is still in Sansar's over 1,000 experiences it seems odd to me. 

It's still there.

 

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Blush Bravin
added pic

[Blush Bravin]

*deleted. .felt it was off topic

Edited January 11, 2019 by Blush Bravin