Materials appliers compatible with Maitreya/The V ?

[AmeliaJ08]

Hello, I finally started experimenting with body materials after many years of just ignoring them. I've found some rather nice options that don't look like I've been dipped in glitter oil but a big issue is how these are not compatible with The V, as far as I can tell. I was hoping to use a subtle normal and specular map applier.

Does such a thing exist? I know the V has a shine hud but that only seems compatible with basic skin shine settings in Maitreya HUD, not full blown materials appliers. I assume the V does support materials appliers of some sort but of course it would have to be something that matches with the rest of the body applier.

[Nalates Urriah]

You are going to have to experiment to be sure. But, no.

The V must have; an applier for itself, use its own color, or BOM. Both the V and a mesh body are items that either have their own textures or use those placed on the avatar (BoM). If you use an applier for the mesh body the texture is not on the avatar (aka system body) and therefore BoM for the V is not going to work. Well, it will but it will show whatever texture or color is on the avatar not the texture 'applied' to the mesh body.

BoM always looks at the avatar's system body. The V is just another item looking at BoM. So, if you use an applier for the body you'll need an applier for the V.

Life is much simpler if you avoid appliers and get everything to use BoM.

Edited August 18 by Nalates Urriah

[AmeliaJ08]

3 hours ago, Nalates Urriah said:

You are going to have to experiment to be sure. But, no.

The V must have; an applier for itself, use its own color, or BOM. Both the V and a mesh body are items that either have their own textures or use those placed on the avatar (BoM). If you use an applier for the mesh body the texture is not on the avatar (aka system body) and therefore BoM for the V is not going to work. Well, it will but it will show whatever texture or color is on the avatar not the texture 'applied' to the mesh body.

BoM always looks at the avatar's system body. The V is just another item looking at BoM. So, if you use an applier for the body you'll need an applier for the V.

Life is much simpler if you avoid appliers and get everything to use BoM.

Yes, I was meaning materials appliers though, as in shine/normal while using BOM to match the skin. I'd avoid appliers entirely but of course BOM doesn't support materials (which is dumb!).

I just wondered if anyone had made a specular/normal applier that worked with bodies and The V but it seems not apparently. Kinda limits its use but makes sense, can't expect to support everything.

 

Edited August 19 by AmeliaJ08

[Nalates Urriah]

For the normal and specular layers the V has settings in the HUD. They are rudimentary and limited. AFAIK no one makes appliers for the V. So whatever the skin-maker supplies for those layers is useless for the V.

[AmeliaJ08]

4 hours ago, Nalates Urriah said:

AFAIK no one makes appliers for the V

Feels like the market is missing something. Maybe people are naked a lot less than I thought!

 

[Gabriele Graves]

Maybe more people than we realise are running without ALM on.

[Nalates Urriah]

20 hours ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Maybe more people than we realise are running without ALM on.

This is one of those odd things we cannot get information about. When Oz Linden was still leading the third-party viewer devs group everyone was trying to get info on the then fairly new ALM. How many people have it turned on? Oz was saying he didn't have the info and that they needed to modify their tracking software to collect that info. But, there were other priorities ahead of it. Whatever, years later we still don't know.

I have seen where setting ALM on is going to be a default setting for the Linden's SL Viewer. With PBR it is very likely going to be a default with the ability to disable it moved into the collection of Debug Settings. This will mean something like 90+% of users will be running with ALM enabled. But... we still won't know for sure.

[SandorWren]

2 minutes ago, Nalates Urriah said:

This is one of those odd things we cannot get information about. When Oz Linden was still leading the third-party viewer devs group everyone was trying to get info on the then fairly new ALM. How many people have it turned on? Oz was saying he didn't have the info and that they needed to modify their tracking software to collect that info. But, there were other priorities ahead of it. Whatever, years later we still don't know.

I have seen where setting ALM on is going to be a default setting for the Linden's SL Viewer. With PBR it is very likely going to be a default with the ability to disable it moved into the collection of Debug Settings. This will mean something like 90+% of users will be running with ALM enabled. But... we still won't know for sure.

I've had ALM turned on for years. Even with older PC's.

[steeljane42]

1 hour ago, Nalates Urriah said:

With PBR it is very likely going to be a default with the ability to disable it moved into the collection of Debug Settings. This will mean something like 90+% of users will be running with ALM enabled. But... we still won't know for sure.

Yes, we will know. LL, FS, Alchemy and any other viewer aside of Cool VL one don't have ability to turn off PBR even through the debug settings. So It'll be exactly 100% of people running updated viewers. Except that Cool VL one, until Henri gets tired of supporting 3 different redenerers.

Edited August 20 by steeljane42
typos