Jump to content

BOM-Native Bento Mesh Heads List?


Recommended Posts

Anyone have a list, or if not, could put together a list, of Bento Mesh Heads that are or have options to be BOM-Native?

What I mean by BOM-Native is that including in the package is at least one copy of the head that has 'no to almost no onion layers'. At a maximum it might have a few "limited layers" for lips, eye makeup, lashes, and the like.

I am NOT referring to BOM-Compatible - by which I mean just applying the BOM onto the skin layer with a HUD button or relay.

 

Presently all I know of is Slink and Lelutka Evolution.

I have heard at least 2 others mentioned in assorted topics in here for other subjects where this topic briefly sidetracked things (often my fault, so this time I am just making it it's own thread)... but I forget what they were.

 

The motive for this is that I'm trying to cut my graphics impact and move away from anything with excessive onion layers, and recreating my look on a new brand is proving difficult, so I'm looking to cast a wide net with demos until I can reel something in... 🙂

I can't be the only one doing this... What with the top mesh body now having gone BOM-native (Maitreya), causing me to finally switch brands for my body; it just seems like I should match that on the head as well.

 

Edited by Pussycat Catnap
title change
Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think the BOM versions of Lightstar heads might qualify, but I'm not entirely certain. I'll check with one of my alts, who owns one, and let you know.

The free Dream head at Free Dove definitely qualifies, as do the Ruth/Roth 2 heads, but... meh. 

ETA: Yes I am correct - the BOM heads with Lightstar are a separate object in the folder from the non-BOM heads, and confirmed with an inspection that they have no onion layers. Here's the numbers if you're interested (BOM head at the top, non-BOM below)

482191507_lightstarhead_001.thumb.jpg.11a91f80b67fd8784e189b81f9e90808.jpg

Didn't realise until today just how low in complexity these heads actually are, even the non-BOM one. Nice job, Krystal.

 

Edited by Lewis Luminos
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

TL;DR  The term "BoM Native" has no meaningful meaning and makes it difficult to decide what heads qualify in order to answer this topic well.

Longer:

I have to say (once more) that I intensely dislike this label "BOM-Native".  It gives exactly the wrong impression and as stated doesn't describe anything meaningful.

"BoM-Native" sounds like a marketing term designed by people to mislead those who don't know any better into believing that their items are superior.  What these items are in reality is "[Almost]/[mostly] only BoM" and that is really a very vague criteria.

This term is cropping up more and more inworld and seems to change definition depending on who is using it or what context it is being used.  If it cannot be pinned it down specifically to a criteria then giving accurate answers to this thread isn't really possible and it mostly comes down to how the people subjectively "feel" about those items, makes them qualify or not.

The presence (or lack) of layers to provide applier functionality or it's complexity has nothing to do with the BoM capability of the item.  If an item is capable of being BoM, fully supports alpha layers then it is as much BoM as it can be and as much BoM as anything else described as "BoM Native".  Even if it uses an applier to activate BoM doesn't necessarily make it a terrible, shouldn't be used, thing.  The distinction is really very, very small and not detectable by any one who doesn't know.

Yes, BoM-only might mean an item "could" be more optimized because applier support brings extra and unnecessary complexity but it doesn't necessarily mean it will be.  An overly complex head (due to aesthetics) without applier layers could be just as bad as having those layers.  Even one of the examples in the OP that is citied as qualifying as "BoM Native" has layers that are unnecessary for BoM.  Older heads by the same creator that still fit the criteria given in the OP but are not included in the label.

Rhetorical questions:

Who gets to decide if an item qualifies for this nebulous label?  How much does it have to rely on BoM only to be "native" enough?  How minimal do the applier layers have to be and who decides?  Are appliers for HD lips and eye shadows only good enough?  Seems so but why not non-HD appliers too?  Does adding applier brows suddenly make it none-Native?  Which is more native, one head that has some applier layers but is less complex overall than a head without any applier support?  Where does the trade off in being minimal mesh and the aesthetics of the head lay?  Do I want a cube head or something exquisitely realistic?  What is the minimum mesh that qualifies?

This hopefully shows how hard it is to effectively draw a line on this.

If you don't want applier support, say so.  If you favour minimal mesh over aesthetics or want to know whose mesh is most optimal, say so.  It isn't hard to do.  "I don't want any applier support for my next head and as efficient mesh as possible, what are my options?"  It isn't any longer to do by the time you have described what you mean by "BoM-Native" anyway but is so much more useful and specific.  Even the term "Made for BoM" would be better.

I realize that this post is really hammering home a point but I think it needs to be done because this keeps coming up and is pointless unless the goal is to mislead.

I would rather we stick to concrete and well specified reasons why a particular head (or anything else) may not be a good choice instead of using bad labels.
 

Edited by Gabriele Graves
corrections.
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2020 at 10:52 PM, Gabriele Graves said:

Who gets to decide if an item qualifies for this nebulous label? 
 

Um, honestly? Everyone who is capable of counting to two or more.  

  • How many layers does the head have?
  • Can it use appliers?

If the answers are "One" and "No" then it's BOM-native. Anything else, and it's not.  @Pussycat Catnap gave a very clear definition of the term, for anyone who has not heard of it before.

The head creator makes a decision about whether a head will be BOM-native or not, at the point of creation. The user can check whether a head is BOM-native or not by a simple check of the head's functionality. Try reading the instruction notecard. Does it say something like "This head cannot use appliers"? 

It's not in any way "nebulous" or subjective. It either is BOM-native or it isn't. There's no such thing as middle-ground on this issue.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lewis Luminos said:

Um, honestly? Everyone who is capable of counting to two or more.  

  • How many layers does the head have?
  • Can it use appliers?

If the answers are "One" and "No" then it's BOM-native. Anything else, and it's not.  @Pussycat Catnap gave a very clear definition of the term, for anyone who has not heard of it before.

The head creator makes a decision about whether a head will be BOM-native or not, at the point of creation. The user can check whether a head is BOM-native or not by a simple check of the head's functionality. Try reading the instruction notecard. Does it say something like "This head cannot use appliers"? 

It's not in any way "nebulous" or subjective. It either is BOM-native or it isn't. There's no such thing as middle-ground on this issue.

But making the distinction between "BOM-native" (BOM pre-applied, no layers) and "mesh that can be used with BOM" (uses any appliers, no layers) is pointless.

There is no "performance difference" between the two, since that's the stated goal of the question.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wulfie Reanimator said:

But making the distinction between "BOM-native" (BOM pre-applied, no layers) and "mesh that can be used with BOM" (uses any appliers, no layers) is pointless.

There is no "performance difference" between the two, since that's the stated goal of the question.

Are you saying that there is no difference in performance between mesh objects of less complexity and fewer triangles compared to objects of higher complexity and more triangles?  None at all? If that is the case whatever is the point of "optimised mesh" at all? And if it IS the case, then you are wrong, there is a definite difference between a BOM-native head and a head "that can be used with BOM". 

482191507_lightstarhead_001.thumb.jpg.11

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's about getting rid of the onion-layers. Not having all that mesh.

With a BOM-Native head, you're not wearing 2-3 copies of the base mesh at the same time.

If you just take some old onion-layer based head and 'apply' the BOM skin to it, you've not changed anything.

Now that BOM can bake in a skin, tattoo, and hairbase layer - that's 3 layers that I no longer desire to see present in the mesh 'onioning'.

Another aspect of BOM-Native, is that you can use a texture-based alpha map to hide parts of it, no need for alpha cuts. Try this out on a copy of Maitreya 5.x+ - put on some old alpha-mask from one of those 2011-era standard sizes clothing items, and you will see parts of Maitreya vanish because it works with this, because it is BOM-Native - they set the alpha layer up right.

 

...just consider this something I want to know what's out there for, just because.

I'm not alone in that - some heads like Lelutka Evolution and the new Slink are enjoying a rise in popularity and one reason often mentioning for it is that they do this.

Edited by Pussycat Catnap
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lewis Luminos said:

Are you saying that there is no difference in performance between mesh objects of less complexity and fewer triangles compared to objects of higher complexity and more triangles?  None at all? If that is the case whatever is the point of "optimised mesh" at all? And if it IS the case, then you are wrong, there is a definite difference between a BOM-native head and a head "that can be used with BOM". 

You're building up quite a straw-man. I'm exceedingly aware of the onion-layer issue, and keenly aware of what BOM does.

Reading the OP again, the definition was clearer (and different from) how you worded it.

  • Your definition was "one or no layers, and can't use appliers"
    • ...which is a pointless criteria because if a mesh body only has a single "layer" but can still use appliers for non-BOM textures, that doesn't fit into your definition despite being equally efficient.
  • Pussycat primarily wanted no extra layers, and (a bit confusingly) also specified that just being able to use BOM textures wasn't good enough if the extra layers were still there.
    • That's perfectly reasonable, nothing to clarify or complain about.

 

But a bit back on topic: I was going to suggest a head but after double-checking it in-world, it actually has two extra layers over the face which can't be removed (although the head is modifiable). @Pussycat Catnap Could you include a photo of the kind of look you're trying to replicate? I have a handful of suggestions but they're probably too anime.

Post mortem.

Edited by Wulfie Reanimator
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Wulfie Reanimator said:

You're building up quite a straw-man.

What...ever...

Can you find someone else to troll by any chance?

Accept my "just because" and move yourself on.

I know you won't... but it'd really be nice if you could bug off, for once. There is a forum for discussing the technology, and threads for that.

I just figured we could make a list of heads that are doing this, without getting a pack of the usual people that like to troll me all the time... I'm sure the rest of the people that troll my posts will follow suit with assorted 'laugh reactions and other notes...

I want this, I'm not alone.

If you want to argue with other people about why it is a good or bad idea, make your own thread and for once, leave me alone. Blocking you so at least I won't have to deal with your trolling for now...

But I guess we just can't do that, can we?

 

 

Edited by Pussycat Catnap
  • Haha 1
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...