Jump to content

Nano Mesh


Marcthur Goosson
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3453 days.

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

Recommended Posts

Did they drop the possibilty to make nano mesh?

A mesh smaller then 0.01x0.01x0.01 is now scaled to this once imported.

I also noticed dimensions are now surface dimensions instead of bounding box.

**

Do I really have to wait till mesh is released? Will everything be final then?

It is very frustrating to model without knowing if and how it will end up in SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lindens

Can you clarify what you want to use such a small object for?

When working with prims, such prims were used to add tiny details to larger objects, as the prim was the smallest unit one could work with.

With meshes, you should be able to put in such details with a few extra triangles in the highest LOD. What is your usecase for needing to generate a mesh object that is smaller than a centimeter on a side?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Nyx I think your question could better be asked to the jewelry makers in SL.

Sure I can make small mesh details on a larger object, I simply combine all to 1 mesh.

But what if I want that detail as a seperate prim.

Many people use very small (smaller then 1cm) parts for accesoires, buttons, chains, etc etc.

Smaller then 1cm might also be handy for thin rails, ropes or other stuff which is straight in 2 axes.

*

Btw the standard prim is not the smallest you can work with.

Nano sculpties go way smaller.

And we don't want sculpties where mesh could give better performance, do we?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And we don't want sculpties where mesh could give better performance, do we?"

Apparently we do for buildings. Details to follow, but I can make a sculpty version of a mesh building with no LOD or shading problems for about half the prim equivalence of the mesh equivalent. It does have about 20 times the number of triangles, but prims are prims, aren't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been told that reusing one mesh several times within a linkset is in general better regarding resource costs than modelling the repetitions in one object (i.e. make one chain out of one mesh object only). Is that correct ? Would then a chain made out of 100 identical (mesh-)prims be less resource intensive than the same arrangement made with only one mesh (containing the same amount of faces)? And would that be a positive argument for allowing tiny meshes ?

Since avatar attachments do not need physics, we can make the hull super simple and resource cost efficient. Is that necessary at all ? Does it make anything more efficient (when worn as attachment) ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Marcthur, et al,

I am making jewelery using mesh and the results so far are promising.  You can get quite small mesh objects. The picture below is a string of about 80 x 8mm pearls (10x10x10mm cube for scale).  The LOD3 mesh is about 7200 vertices. With appropriate LOD2 and very simple LOD1/0/Phys I managed to get the prim cost down to 1 when worn using 233252 build.  (Although streaming cost still said 3.6??) [[ when rezzed on the ground cost is 4.0]]

The ARC for this when worn is only about 20 compared to much higher numbers 100's when using sphere prims to make the equivilent object.  Depending on what the Lindens do to ARC estimation with mesh this looks like reducing the viewer loads for some of the very complex attachments being worn these days.   Hair is next . :-)

Cho.

PearlNecklace.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great string, looks good.

Yes and of course this is possible with mesh.

Suppose I just want 1 pearl and create a little ornament with that or a piercing.

Not every creator will be able to make mesh and will rely on building parts.

Nano mesh is really needed, and  will finally give possibility to make good looking content below 1cm.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Marcthur,

Yes I see what you mean, you can make them small using transparency on a base to get your minimum size.  There was similar cheat I recall with small spheres being the hollow of a sphere with trans outside and a reversed texture mapped onto the inside of the holllow.    The image below is of 1mm items against the minimum prim size of 10x10x10mm  I'm sure similar things can be made for a variety of shapes.  Prim cost is at least 1 to 2 depending on faces and LOD settings.  How well the transparency works against other trans textures is still uncertain.  It is possible... could easily get smaller.  What is the minimum size used now with normals prims/sculpties?

Cho. ^_^

TinyMesh1mmgems.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hii Rusalka,

Yes it is a bit much these days.... I was hoping mesh might bring some sanity to the overuse of tiny prims now on the main grid.  With mesh we can control LOD and use very low prim representations, mostly 2D ribbons with texture, for long/mid distance at low overall cost to server/sim/viewer.    It appears at the moment that mesh can drop ARC shown in recent viewers significantly compared to the same object built from prims/sculpties.  How the Lindens will scale this in the future is uncertain as revealed in the last mesh meeting when it was stated it will not be decided until introduced to the main grid :-(.;

Cho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lindens

ARC is not accurate for meshes.

Using individeual tiny pieces to build up jewelry is probably not going to be terribly economical from a cost perspective. We can only LOD each individual mesh "prim", so a linkset of hundreds of small mesh prims can only be reduced in triangle count so low, which is the same issue we have with jewelry in SL today. I'd encourage jewelry makers who want to use mesh to make complete pieces in their modelers, rather than creating each gem or chain link and assembling in-world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Nyx et al,

Indeed this is what I am trying to do, use one or two meshes with super low LOD0/LOD1 meshes that appear to show the av wearing something but gracefully snap into 3d as you move closer.  Hopefully lowering the cost to the viewer/server in doing so.  With shadows being so resource hungry on older hardware any little bit of dropping rendering costs but still allowing users to dress their avvies well is a bonus. 

Hopefully the scaling of the ARC cost as a metric will happen soon and favour implementers that make effort to reduce prim costs of worn items significantly.  Perhaps then ARC can be used as  a marketing tool to show up product differences.  ie: Use the ARC to push attachement makers to make more efficient and better objects with lower rendering and server costs to benifit all, rather than the prim inflation happening now with such items.

On Nano prims I agree their use is limited due to cost and rightly so.  Jewelers kits of single prims will have to be replaced with out world tools such as blender with python scripts to create the mesh using simple mesh primitives. The tool then combines the objects into single mesh for import to SL.  LOD generation and optimisation is an issue here and unless the scripts are very, very good the user will have to put in effort to make LOD0/LOD1/LOD2 look good and use very little vertexes and re-use UVmaps/textures to lower cost.

Cho ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a 0.5 cm prim/mesh, then your camera has to be less than 8 cm away to see the high LOD, even at renderVolumeLODFactor = 4. However, if you combine many 0.5 cm meshes into one 10 cm one, the the high LOD will be visible from ten times further away. At these sizes, the effect on streaming cost is negligible, Son you much better off making the bigger meshes.

Now your mention of kits does raise a very interesting possibility. an inworld tool for combining meshes. I don't see why that should be too difficult to implment, except perhaps for permission issues. The viewer could join the meshes* and make the data ready for upload, show you the prim equivalences, and charge the usual fee for upload of the combined meshes. I think it might need a special mesh meld permission just for this, as most people wouldn'y want their meshes getting combined.

* there used to be a Consolidate button in the uploader that did just that. Don't know what happened to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

From a perspective of a modeler or a server coder, yes, small meshes are not economical.  But SL is about a lot more than economy of prims or textures.  If SL was made to the specifications of it's creators, every ground would have the same texture, we'd have linden trees, box houses and no one would torture prims.  Result:  there would be nobody here.  One of the best ideas that Philip had was to let everything in SL be created by people who live there, not LL.

Creating objects of beauty that no one has ever seen or imagined before is one of the biggest draws to SL for artists and designers.  Many of them are able to express themselves creatively by making things that bring them tremendous satisfaction, both from a technical and artistic standpoint. And many of them sell their creations to fellow residents.  If you have looked at the marketplace jewelry offerings, you will see breathtaking creations that cannot be made (or worn) in real life - but people own and wear them here.  I sell rings every day to people who get married in SL (thousands of people get married in SL every month) and they are cherished by their owners.  They get engravings INSIDE the rings done, and no one ever sees it but them.  When you are standing a distance away from the avatar, it's even hard to see they are wearing a ring, but what they have on may have 256 prims and took 20 hours of work to design and create.

From a jeweler's standpoint, pieces are made from parts, and small parts are our bread and butter.  Many jewelers today have huge investments in sculpts and fewer people use tortured prims than in the past.  Some call this lazy but there are shapes that can be made with sculpts that are difficult to make.  As mesh becomes part of SL, more people will want the detail that mesh can bring by purchasing those parts from modelers.  Not all jewelers want to become modelers!

I urge you most strongly to not hinder the creation of nano meshes on the basis of it being "non-economical" or "invisible at a distance".  People who create small items and people who buy small items such as jewelry do not care about these issues at all.  They want to make and buy things of beauty to enhance their second lives.  Jewelry is such a small part of SL, I cannot imagine how limiting such a niche market will improve anyone's experience.  Improve server function so that people's sex toys or dance AOs don't lag a quarter second?  Is this really an issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Very well put, Meri, and I see no answer to that yet.  I'm a little late to the table - I have come to building mesh kicking and screaming, but I finally relented in my pursuit of the perfect shells - and have made the time and monetary investment to accomplish that. Btw, I'm finding this transition to mesh a solitary and "out-of-world" venture so far - which I think is counter to what I think LL was trying to accomplish in the first place (in-world creation, in-world tools, cooperative in-world building?).

Would someone from this thread please clarify work-arounds for, say, earrings that still come in with a 0.010 limitation?  Invisible prims?  Please direct me to a link?  Thank you in advance...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3453 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...