Jump to content

USING A REMOTE DESKTOP


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 141 days.

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

Recommended Posts

Okay so here it goes, I'm currently using a laptop to take second life pictures on.  I take decent pics on this but I know if i want better quality pics i would need a different computer. Ive thought about using one of those services where you pay to log into a remote desktop and game from there. I just want it to play second life and take better quality of pics.  Has anyone done this and would if work for what i want to use it for? 

 

thanks :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   Never tried it, but if it's anything like using Second Life via TeamViewer .. I don't expect it'd work too well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoneyBee759 said:

Okay so here it goes, I'm currently using a laptop to take second life pictures on.  I take decent pics on this but I know if i want better quality pics i would need a different computer. Ive thought about using one of those services where you pay to log into a remote desktop and game from there. I just want it to play second life and take better quality of pics.  Has anyone done this and would if work for what i want to use it for? 

 

thanks :)

I'm curious whether the laptop/computer would actually make any difference to the quality of the picture as it is the viewer doing the picture taking. There maybe some bearing on your resolution but not sure if even that would have any effect on the picture quality.

Edited by Arielle Popstar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I'm curious whether the laptop/computer would actually make any difference to the quality of the picture as it is the viewer doing the picture taking. There maybe some bearing on your resolution but not sure if even that would have any effect on the picture quality.

For the most part, SL viewers will not allow enabling rendering features that the computer doesn''t support. So long as you're able to tick all the whizzy boxes (ALM, etc), you should get the same image as any other computer with those same boxes checked. Frame rate isn't an issue when you're taking snapshots, excepting the tedium involved in setting up a shot when the frame rate is abysmally slow.

Even resolution isn't an issue if you're using a viewer like Firestorm that allows setting the snapshot size independently of screen resolution. Firestorm's current maximum snapshot size is 7680x7680.

On my Mac laptop, I disable HiDPI, ALM and other settings to speed things along at the expense of visuals. When I want to take a snapshot, I'll turn on everything but HiDPI (which only affects the live scene) and set the snapshot size appropriate to my needs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoneyBee759 said:

Ive thought about using one of those services where you pay to log into a remote desktop and game from there.

I don't know those services but any remote desktop can record your password. My only suggestion make sure they are trustworthy.

In theory yes. You can get better results via remote desktop if target computer have better hardware. But remote control not very smooth (depending location and your connection) it might be harder to control.

PS: It helps if you share current configuration (laptop) for compassion.

Edited by RunawayBunny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can try this service called Shadow.Tech. It’s a complete remote pc that lets you install anything on it. The lowest option is $12 per month but even this option gives you a good graphics card. If you try it let us know how well it works.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Even resolution isn't an issue if you're using a viewer like Firestorm that allows setting the snapshot size independently of screen resolution. Firestorm's current maximum snapshot size is 7680x7680

Yes, this will give you way better pictures.  Open the camera like you are going to take a picture and the place to set the pixels up is on the left side.  You could also push your graphics up to ULTRA for pictures.  You can then put your graphics down where you have it for busy places after you take your pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make the Width x Hieght as large as you can and save it on your desktop the image will be too huge to upload to SL but you can upload it to flickr save it as large size (option on the bottom right of flickr pics) then you can upload it to SL.  People can easily blow the picture up on flickr if they want to see it close up.  For some reason doing this huge image makes a higher quality image even once it makes it to SL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2021 at 12:11 AM, JUSTUS Palianta said:

Make the Width x Hieght as large as you can and save it on your desktop the image will be too huge to upload to SL but you can upload it to flickr save it as large size (option on the bottom right of flickr pics) then you can upload it to SL.

   SL only support texture sizes up to 1024, dividable by 2; 1024, 512, 256, 128, 64, 32, 16, 8 .. Not sure about 4. I think the 'blank' and 'transparent' default textures are 8 x 8? If you try to upload a larger texture, it will try to resize or give you an error.

   It's also good to know that SL don't deal with aspect ratios any well. If you have an image that's 1024 x 768 pixels (4:3), SL will stretch it into a 1024 x 1024 image, which may cause it to lose quality even if you then squash it back to display as 1024 x 768 in-world. Some people suggest you stretch it in your image manipulator first as the results may be less distorted (i.e. take your picture and resize it to 1024 x 1024) before uploading it.

On 5/1/2021 at 12:11 AM, JUSTUS Palianta said:

For some reason doing this huge image makes a higher quality image even once it makes it to SL

   Yes and no. Mostly nah. Capturing an image in higher resolution does allow you higher precision when editing the image, but when you scale it back down to upload it into SL, much of the fine detail will be lost - depending on how you scale the image though, the compression may be smoother than it would be (i.e. pixels shading to create smoother lines, a bit the same way anti-aliasing works), compared to the resulting image shot in native resolution in the viewer. But, you will very rarely see any textures in SL in their actual resolution. If you have a 1024 x 1024 profile, that's going to be severely compressed in your profile window - for most screens it'd have to take up most of the screen before being in its native size. Anything in world will have its texture detail vary depending on how far away your camera is from the object, so if you put a 512 x 512 texture on a 1 x 1 meter prim, it's only going to be displayed as its native resolution when you're zoomed in in such a way that the object takes up that many pixels on your display - and then there's the whole 'different monitors have different pixel densities' thing, and then there's the whole 'different screens have differences both in their hardware and their software settings', making colours appear different from screen to screen; when you take a picture on your end, the gamma, pallet, and saturation may look *perfect* on your end, but when another person views the picture on a different monitor, it will almost certainly not appear 100% the same way.

   It's frequently brought up by logo designers (and visual designers in general); they can create something that looks great on their end, but the customers rarely see the same colour pallet when they actually print the stuff because of differences in monitor calibration, and this often leads to them feeling tricked, or think that you did something wrong because it doesn't look the way they expected.

   TL:DR - nobody gets textures just right because there's no such thing as 'perfect' due to the many, many nuances that influences how they are portrayed to other users. Whilst universal perfection is impossible to achieve, all you can do is as few mistakes as possible to get the best result possible. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/1/2021 at 3:56 AM, HoneyBee759 said:

I'm currently using a laptop to take second life pictures on.  I take decent pics on this but I know if i want better quality pics

 

the Linden LMR5 viewer allows me to take a snapshot 7680x7680 pixels on my NVidia 1050TI

to do this then untick Snapshot Constrain Proportions, set Height x Width boxes to 7680. and Format: PNG

saving snapshot as lots of pixels allows for better clarity/manipulation/sampling/etc in our external photo editing tool

not sure if this capability is in other viewers, I think so tho

edit add:

the maximum size of the snapshot might be a hardware constraint, not sure. So I put my dets here:

Second Life Release 6.4.18.558365 (64bit)
Second Life Server 2021-04-21.558586

CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz (3400.03 MHz)
Memory: 16318 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 10 64-bit (Build 19041.928)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 1050 Ti/PCIe/SSE2

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 27.21.14.5671
OpenGL Version: 4.6.0 NVIDIA 456.71

Window size: 2498x1417
Font Size Adjustment: 96pt
UI Scaling: 1
Draw distance: 128m
LOD factor: 1.125
Render quality: 5
Advanced Lighting Model: Enabled
Texture memory: 512MB
VFS (cache) creation time: November 07 2020 01:03:23

J2C Decoder Version: KDU v7.10.4
 

 

 

Edited by Mollymews
typs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

A remote desktop type setup will run US$10 or more per month. Used laptops and desktops go for $200+/-. Good refurbished more like $500+.

Getting good quality images from SL is tricky but it doesn't have to require a high end computer. I'll explain it this way...

The viewer creates the images using whatever is available in the computer. Most of us use Firestorm and Black Dragon for our photos. So we all have the same basic camera. Most of the differences in image quality are not so much from hardware as they are from the photographers' talent and understanding of how things work.

In the viewer, render speed, as in frames per second (FPS), and render quality are pretty much mutually exclusive trade offs. More quality means less FPS. The power and capability of the computer changes the quality and speed balance points... basically meaning I'll live with this quality at this speed... getting more computer power means I can have more quality and speed. But, for just photos we can give up performance and take the snapshot. Weaker computers take longer to render the high quality scene but they will render it. The viewer uses newer computer features to speed up the render. But without those features the viewer adapts and grinds out whatever you have turned on using the CPU. It can be REALLY S L O W.

The viewers have presets for the graphics settings. It is easy to change to performance and move around to setup the shot, switch to quality, wait for the render, and click the shutter.

Getting a more powerful computer makes it easier and saves us time. Depending on your patience and available time you can get by with a weaker computer. Being short either of those or both, you'll need to come up with a better computer.

Some using older computers switch to using the Cool VL Viewer or Singularity. The amount of computer power required by those viewers is less thus allowing you to to maintain a speed at higher quality. The UI is old style v1.0, which is clunky by today's viewers. But, try one or both of those viewers to see if they give you more of what you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 141 days.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...