Coby Foden

Thomas Galbreus wrote: I just quoted the German law, which demands a technical exclusion of minors from porn. :matte-motes-yawn: - - - - - - - Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Yay! :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileyhappy: :smileyhappy: :matte-motes-big-grin:

:matte-motes-yawn: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Yay! :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileyhappy:

No problems here with the auto update. No errors whatsoever.

Occasionally one can still see somebody (newbie) wearing blinging items, such as shoes and jewelry. Most likely there are still lots of old blinging stuff in some old freebie junk yards.

Phil Deakins wrote: I just added to my post, and I can't find it now either. But I'm certain I set it earlier today, and I'm really puzzled. What did you drink Phil?

Whirly Fizzle wrote: Yes! :matte-motes-big-grin-wink: SUN-130 - Real mirror reflections on prims Perfect! We want mirrors. :matte-motes-smile: Then after implementing it grid wide Linden Lab can make a blog post: Mirrors! Finally in Second Life. :smileyhappy:

buttbadger Mirabeau wrote: I'm thinking of changing for a nvidia card with similar performances. Is a geforce GT610 or 630 would do the thing? I don't mind if my fps is less than 20, i just want sl to randomly crash now Hmm... I have a feeling that those cards would not make much difference compared to what you have now. For reference I have NVidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti and it gives pretty decent and smooth experience in most places in SL. I can even use shadows which add a lot of realism to SL.

Phil Deakins wrote: What? Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world? You're kidding, of course! No. This thread is about porn and some laws in Germany. :matte-motes-wink:

Unfortunately when looking at the benchmarks for that card it is very obvious that it is very low performance card. You certainly need something faster for nicer and smoother Second Life experience.

Be aware also that many people have attached lights disabled in their viewer. So they will not see the effect of your facelight at all. Personally I feel that there is no need for facelights. They look ridiculous at night, they look ridiculous during day time when one has shadows enabled. There are lots Windlight settings which render avatar's face nicely. Use those instead of facelight if you want to see your avatar's face looking nice to you. Then your non-existent facelight will not annoy anybody. Which is great. Look, no facelight here: Advanced Lighting Model: on; Ambient occlusion: on; Shadows: on. (I forgot what Windlight setting that place used.)

phaedra Exonar wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Ooooh, I'd forgotten about mirror water! And that method is double fun. Who doesn't like walking on walls? I've often thought about building sideways in a sim because the buildable foot print would be 256x4096m. Cool. Now we would need only a way to rotate the gravity and this would be perfect. :matte-motes-big-grin: :matte-motes-wink:

In Firestorm viewer [version 4.6.5.40833] there are two settings: • MaxFPS: Yield some time to the local host if we reach a threshold framerate • FSLimitFramerate: Enable framerate limitation defined by MaxFPS In Firestorm we set the MaxFPS to the required value and we set the FSLimitFramerate to True in debug settings. We can do both also in Preferences, Graphics, Rendering. Tick the LimitFramerate box and set the FPS to the required value. In Second Life viewer [version 3.7.12 (291824)] there is only one setting: • MaxFPS: Yield some time to the local host if we reach a threshold framerate In Second Life viewer the MaxFPS has no effect at all. I guess it does not do anything because the LimitFramerate is missing. (The FSLimitFramerate is specific setting in Firestorm.)

(Hint: ...you just replied to a post which was made 2 years, 8 months and 30 days ago.) :matte-motes-asleep:

Splatulated wrote: if none any legit 3rd party sites to buy lin from ?? and can a 3rd party site be used to get past the 1st time buyers lin cap of $30.00 ? id liek to get 10,000 lin but if i could buy lin normally id be capped at 7000-7500 Splatulated... please... :smileywink: :matte-motes-big-grin: The money used in Second Life is not a lin. Please stop using your own invented abbreviations. You're driving us crazy. :smileyvery-happy: The money (or token) is called Linden dollar. Abbreviated as L$. Please do use those. See? The L$ is even shorter than your invention 'lin'. Isn't it nice? Thank you very much for your kind attention. :matte-motes-smile: [Rant off] :matte-motes-asleep:

Why it happened? • You have been wearing some non-human avatar or some strangely shaped human like avatar (e.g. such as tiny avatar) • You change back to normal human avatar but the system still does not display it right How to fix? • Wear (don't drag and drop) normal human avatar • Log off from Second Life • Then log back in Now your shape should look normal. Most of the time this works. Good luck.

Just bumping up this sleepy thread. :matte-motes-big-grin: Even after being over seven years in SL there's always some new beautiful places to be found. This is a raw snapshot - no editing done at all.

Karbos wrote: I beg to differ! Me too - to differ from your view. :matte-motes-big-grin: :matte-motes-sunglasses-3: Long mesh hair looks like it's made of clay, with painted on hair strands. It looks very unnatural when it bends with avatar animations. No real hair acts like long mesh hair does. With flexies it is possible to achieve more realistic looking long hair. Then there are hairs where the base is mesh and additional flexies to give the hair some life. Those can be pretty convincing looking. So flexies for hairs definitely still have their uses. For short hairs and up-do hairs mesh is ok as there is no need for the flexiness. Mesh is great but mesh is not the only solution for 'everything'. :smileywink:

What you have done most likely is that you have attached it to a wrong attachment location. There is nothing wrong with the skirt itself. To correct things: first detach the skirt. Then do this: Attach to --> Stomach if that does not bring it back to proper place then try this: Attach to --> Pelvis Either one of those should bring the skirt back to the original place - unless you have totally messed the location. Anyway, whatever you have done you can manually move it to the correct place. Be sure to attach it first to either Stomach or Pelvis, then move the skirt. No other attachment location will work right with skirts. Good luck. :smileyhappy:

Cathy Foil wrote: Hi Gaia, The push, pull and smooth tool as I have described wouldn't actually affect the weights of the mesh so calling it a "Weight Paint Tool" would be misleading. The push, pull and smooth tool would be more of a "Sculpting Paint Tool" where it just moves the vertices in and out a bit for some fine adjustments. I probably have it do it by pushing or pulling directly towards the or away from the camera. The smooth function of the tool would just average the vertices. The erase tool would just move it back to the vertices original position though if you had the brush set or 10% it would just move the vertice back towards its original position by 10% not all the way back. This is exactly what I would like to have in the viewer. "A vertex adjustment tool". For newbies and unexperienced people there shoud be also an option "revert mesh back to original" as a safety measure.

Amza Hydraconis wrote: For a while now, i've been wondering if there is a wiki page that shows the top toolbar icons and their meanings. In the viewer there is a built in explanation for the meaning of those icons. Just hover you mouse on top of any icon there. An explanation what the icon means will show up. You can even click the icon, and then a window with more detailed explanation will pop up.

This subject needs a ... ... flag. :smileyvery-happy:

RipleyVonD wrote: Having weight paint tools or a weight paint room where you can view your purchased clothing and influence its shape would be the solution for this problem. Excellent idea Ripley. There is often a need to pull, push and adjust some vertices in clothing item to make it fit perfectly.

The reason you see the avatar like that can also be due to that you are using the default camera view. That view has the camera very high; which makes the legs look shorter than what they actually are. The default camera view is also one reason why we see (with better camera location) so many "grasshopper" legs avatars walking about the grid. Insanely high heels even enhance the grasshopper legs syndrome. Well, you were talking about that the knees look too low. First of all you might want to check how the avatar looks with better camera location. You can set that in the Debug Settings. It's in the advanced menu; if you cannot see the advanced menu then press CTRL-ALT-D When you have the Debug Settings window open a quick way for a better camera location is by changing the values in CameraOffsetRearView to the following: X = -3.700 Y = 0 Z = -0.100 Then check how does the avatar look in this view. If it still looks strange (knees too low) then most likely the shape indeed has rather bad proportions. By the way, I'm curious to know how you see the image below? Does it look ok to you, or not ok? The left one is Second Life avatar, the right one is a real woman (with avatar's hair overlaid on it).

Cathy Foil wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: if you try to upload a file bigger than 2048x2048 it tells you the max size is 2048x2048... i have a 1024x1024 that i made for a mesh house i was going to make. it covers all sides and faces.. one single texture. How is that worse than 10 512x512s? I have zero lag when it comes to SL. I have great internet and a very fast PC. why should i pay more for a texture? Perhaps LL has increased the texture size limit since I last checked or it is a third party viewer that you are using? I will definitely be doing some research to see what the current size limit in SL is. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Limits All Viewers Maximum texture size - 1024×1024 pixels All Second Life textures are constrained to powers of 2 (e.g., 128, 256, 512). Some textures inworld have a resolution as high as 2048×2048; this is due to a previous limit that was higher. Max Clothing Texture - 512x512 px (except 128x128 px for eyes) - Server Side Appearance will downsize larger textures. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Texture_sizes http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Texture_Usage

Ok, let's forget the word "greedy"; instead I can put the thing around this way: I would feel very stupid if I bought some no mod clothing item and then bought the same item again with other colours, possibly three, four or five different colours and paid for all of those colour variations the full price. Why would I feel stupid? Because I know that the creator made that other colour variation very fast in few seconds, there was not much effort nor time spent in creating it. So I would feel that I paid the full price for the few seconds of work; it would not feel "right". Of course it would be different matter if there was actually different nice texturing done, then there was effort done in creating it, naturally the designer wants to be paid for the effort and that's all right. Yes, I want to pay the full price for the effort, but not for the few mouse clicks. :smileyhappy: