Coby Foden

Ren Toxx wrote: Could anyone suggest a feasible method to contact an SL merchant for customer feedback anonymously I realize this sounds like a weird... (Sorry, couldn't help derailing...) :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileywink:

Phil Deakins wrote: Coby Foden wrote: I hope that Phil reads Pamela's post - carefully and open mindedly. :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileywink: I did read Pamela's post with an open mind, Coby What works works, and what doesn't work still doesn't work. But thank you anyway that finally in the other thread you did agree that what I suggested indeed would work too. It was just some misunderstanding what we actually were talking about - which caused our disagreement discussion based on non applicable (to the discussion) matters. I was talking about something "if" and you were trying refute it by "what is now" matters. But in the end all was well: What works now, works as it works - and also the other idea would work as suggested. Great! :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileywink:

Phil Deakins wrote: I'm teeing off shortly so this can't be a full reply to your post. I'll just answer that last bit for now. The idea of RL sizes in an empty SL would work in exactly the same way is it works in the current SL. Avatars and furniture would work just fine, but room sizes must be bigger than RL because of the way we see. So your idea of having avatar and furniture sizes the same as RL, and having bigger rooms because of the way we see, would work just fine. We've never been in disagreement about that. Thank you very much. :smileyhappy: That was the whole point of this discussion. I just forgot to start my thread with the statement about empty SL thing - and then continue with presentation of my idea. Wow, it's fun to see that we do agree (in spite of some pointless misunderstandings on the way).

Syo Emerald wrote: In general, I noticed a lot people, no matter what language they spoke, get lazy or aren't used to type correctly as soon as they get into anything that can be called "chat". When somebody chats with me and constanly uses sloppy language, like - "hw r u" - not minding about capitals nor punctuation, I get an urge to comment "is your keyboard broken?". And when I see such sloppiness in forums I go totally nuts - or I just ignore the post without any further reading. (lol) :matte-motes-sick: :smileywink:

Now as everybody knows what GAH is, let's see how it works in collaborative building. (Take this as a joke. :smileyvery-happy:) Ava1: We need to make building for a shop. Ava2: Ok. Let's make it together to save time. Ava1: Good. You make half and I make half. Ava2: Would a layout of 40 m x 80 m be big enough? Ava1: Meters! You must be kidding! They don't work in SL. Ava2: What we use then? Ava1: I have read that general avatar heights is the only reliable thing. Ava2: Humm... and where do we get that height from (let's call it GAH). Ava1: Well, there isn't any info about GAH anywhere. Ava1: It has been said that we must go into world and observe a lot of avatars. Ava1: After that we would have a good feeling what is the size of GAH. Ava1: Then we can make our own avatars to the same height and use them for measuring. Ava2: Hehe... avatars cannot be used as a measuring tape. LOL Ava1: Silly! We don't actually measure with avatar. We eyeball and estimate sizes against it. Ava2: I see. Let's go then and explore the world and observe avatars. Ava2: Every day for some 5 hours each day for the duration of two weeks should be enough? Ava1: Yes, that should be fine. After two weeks... Ava1: Hi. Everything ok? Ava2: Everything went fine. I have a good estimation of GAH. Ava1: Me too. :-) Ava1: I have decided that the store layout should be 20 GAH x 40 GAH. Ava1: So each of us must make 20 GAH x 20 GAH. Ava2: Height for two storey building... hmm... 6 GAH should be ok. Ava2: We should make also some furniture so customers can relax while shopping. Ava1: Yes. Now we have all the info needed. Let's go and build. Ava2: Let's meet here again after we are both ready with our building halves. Ava2: We will link them together here. Ava1: Hey, don't forget to adjust your height to the GAH before building! Ava2: Nope. That's valuable info collected. :-) When the building halves are ready... Ava1: Ok, let's rez our building halves and link them. Here's mine. Ava2: And here's mine. Let's move them next to each other. Ava1: What the ... Ava2: OMG! (@-@), They are not the same size! Ava1: Did you adjust your height to the GAH you got from your observations? Ava2: I sure did. Did you? Ava1: Of course I did. Ava2: But we are different heights. You are about half head taller than I am. Ava1: Well, I mostly went to those crowded popular clubs to observe avatars. And you? Ava2: Sailing places, various places. Not to clubs at all. What will we do now? Ava1: We can resize either half to match the other one. Ava2: Ok. Which half shall we resize then? Ava1: It has been said that in SL big works better than small. So we resize the small one. Before they have resized, enters one petite avatar... Ava3: Hello guys. I came to see what you have here. Ava1: Hi. Welcome. :-) Ava2: Hi. Just ask if you need any assistance. Ava3: Strange. Why half of the shop is bigger than the other half? Ava1: I made the other half and Ava2 made the other half. Ava2: We both used GAH as a reference for sizes. Ava1: Here's a notecard what GAH is and how to obtain it. Ava3: Hmm.. interesting. I've never before seen such bulsh.. (Oppss.. sorry, blushes..) Ava3: Let's see inside? Ava1: You're welcome. :-) Ava3: Hmm.. even the furniture sizes are different. Did you notice? Ava1: They are also made by using GAH as a reference. Ava3: Did you both use your own estimations for GAH according to your individual observations? Ava2: Yes, we did. Ava3: Holy crap! Why didn't you combine the observations data and estimate GAH from that? Ava1: The instructions didn't mention anything about combining observations. Ava2: Besides there are designers all over SL. It's impossible to combine everybody's data. Ava1: They should arrive to same GAH after collecting enough observation data. Ava3: Hum... why didn't you use meters? Meter is exact, always the same length. Ava1: Meters are irrelevant in SL. Meters don't work right here. GAH is the only thing that matters! Ava3: I see, you guys obviously have studied things thoroughly? Ava1: Thanks, we indeed have done so. :-) Ava3: By the way, why the building is so huge? Ava1: Everything in SL is big. That's the way it is and has always been – and will be. Ava2: Because the building is based in GAH it naturally comes big because avatars are big. Ava1: Yes, and big works better in SL than small. Ava2: It has something to do with default camera location I think. Ava1: It's mysteriously hidden in some obscure setting what people in general cannot find. Ava1: So in general we are stuck with it and everobody have to learn to accept it. Ava1: I have even heard that small avatars have difficulties in moving indoors. Petite avatar is going upstairs... Ava3: YOU'RE RIGHT. It's difficult for me to climb up these stairs. Ava1: SEE, that's what I said! Ava3: May I fly here? Ava1: No flying here! Ava1: If you flew from place to place here like a bat you would miss to see lots of things. Ava1: We want customers to walk here, so they are sure to see everything. Ava3: I wonder though that why I don't have any difficulties in my cosy place? Ava3: Everything is based on meter and natural sizes. Ava3: The house is bigger than what I could afford in RL. :-) It's not huge anyway. Ava1: I think you are either hallucinating or dreaming in your place. Under heavy medication? Ava1: It is impossible for builds and avatars based on meter and in RL sizes to work well in SL. Ava1: It cannot work. SL is not built that way at all. It is not. Ava2: SL is meant for BIG things, some even think ”the bigger, the better”. Ava2: It's a pity that there is a limit how tall an avatar can be. :-( Ava1: Nothing to worry, in mesh avatars there is no limit in size. Ava2: Really? How very interesting. :-) Ava1: I saw one female mesh avatar in one island. Standing 7.5 meters tall! Ava1: That should make anybody happy! :-)) Available in Marketplace. Ava3: !(@_@)! Ava3: That'll be outdoors avatar only. It cannot get inside anywhere. Ava3: You might consider taking one wall off from your building. Ava3: At least then those giants will see inside and be able to buy something. Ava3: Oh, you also might need to re-estimate your GAHs. ;-) Ava3: In case if those avatars come popular... Ava3: Ok, thanks guys. This was an amuzi... I mean interesting experience. Ava3: I will go back to my place now – to dream that my place works ok.

Phil Deakins wrote: Ah. Thank you Coby. Did you make it up (GAH) or is it something that used in general? Hehehe, I invented that short GAH explanation based on what you have said about general avatar heights and how to use that in creating content. :matte-motes-sunglasses-1:

Phil Deakins wrote: By all means scale things, but 1:1 does not work. It only works if you abandon the idea of RL-size rooms - which you've done anyway, so your RL-sized idea is already broken I can only LOL about this Phil. You agree that RL sizing would work in avatars and objects. How does the thing that avatar is happier in larger room would break my idea in any way? Your statement does not make any sense at all. Your GAH sized avatar might need 2 times larger room than typical RL room is. What makes you think that smaller avatar would need as large room as the big avatar? Is it very hard for you to understand that small avatar would need smaller room than the big avatar? Maybe you didn't undestand my room/furniture sizes comparisons at all for big and small avatar? There must be something what you don't understand. And I don't undestand what is it. Don't refer to the default camera view - what supposedly most might use. We can adjust it to a better one. Stating that because of the default camera view - RL sizing does not work is not a very sound argument. It's like saying "this car is broken because I don't know how to adjust the seat - it does not work for my size". So what's left when you think "hey, the camera can be adjusted"? Does the RL sizing work or not? Don't argue something like "it doesn't work because everything is big already". That's not the point at all. As an experiment think that virtual world is totally empty and we are just laying out things. Would my idea work or not? That's the point of this thread.

Phil Deakins wrote: First. What does GAH mean? Here goes, short explanation of GAH method: (:smileyvery-happy:) GAH is short for ”General Avatar Heights”. There isn't any information anywhere how tall this GAH is. To obtain GAH it goes something like this: You go inworld often, spend many hours there each day for a period of your choosing. What you do during that time is that you observe the avatars near you, make mental notes of their heights (no need to actually measure the avatars and make notes, just eyeball them). After you feel that you have made enough observations you have some mental image of the general avatar height (i.e. GAH). What you do next is that you adjust your height to this GAH. Don't measure your avatar with a prim, don't rely on what the viewer tells for your height. Just eyeball your avatar and adjust the height so that it matches the GAH instilled in your mind. How do you use GAH? After you have adjusted your avatar to GAH you're ready to go. You use your avatar as reference when creating content. You eyeball your avatar, and you eyeball your content under creation. When it looks that the size of content matches the size of avatar then your content is ready. Congratulations! Instead of GAH, can we use meters in content creation? What the GAH supporters might say is: ”Absolutely not! Meters are totally meaningless in SL. They have no use whatsover. Meters just confuse matters. Only thing that matters is GAH. Linden Lab should have measured even land and prims in GAHs instead of confusing meters. Meters in SL are evil, they are trying convert SL into RL.” Are there any bad side effects in using GAH? There are rumours that GAH method is rather inaccurate and that it continues to spread and support gigantism. It has been also said that it breaks relative scale and consistent sizing of things. That might be due to the fact that designers who use GAH use their own individual GAH based on their personal observations. Therefore GAH comes in many sizes. There is no common GAH what every designer could use. One more thing: when a group of designers make a building together they could have hard time in deciding who's GAH to use as a measuring stick. (The again, GAH experts might have more positive ideas about GAH). :smileytongue: [ETA] Corrected spelling error, in one place the GAH had transformed itself into a GAF. Weird! What's going on here? :smileyindifferent:

Miko Kuramoto wrote: it's been done, awhile ago along with a lot of other people -- the mods are closing them as "duplicates" so the original is buried somewhere. Way to go LL. If the thing does not get fixed, maybe we just need to open new bug reports - over and over again. If not anything else, at least it might help towards that direction that Linden Lab will realize that it was not very excellent idea to hide the bug reports from general viewing. Just extra work for them in closing duplicates as we have no way of knowing what bugs have been reported already. Ufff..

Yes, there is no box to tick to upload temporary textures - because temporary textures do not work any more in SL. However you can use local textures instead. Does not cost anything. Look here how to use local textures: http://modemworld.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/local-textures-now-part-of-the-sl-viewer/ and http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Rolig_Loon/Local_Textures PS. Local textures are available on any recently updated viewers by now.

Perrie Juran wrote: Oh, so your the girl who's been camming my ass from just outside of radar range. Now I know! LOL Perrie. :smileysurprised: :smileywink:

Phil Deakins wrote: And, as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) the avatar height slider is a different measurement to the prim measurement, even though they both use meters. It used to be, anyway, and it probably still is. So anyone who sets their height with the Appearance editor, would get it wrong anyway. To be clear: The avatar appearance editor uses exactly the same meter (exactly the same lenght) as is used for prim and land measurement. Meter is the same meter all over SL. There are no different sizes of meter. But something is wrong anyway? Yes. In the appearance editor it just says "Height". Naturally people - who don't know better - assume that this is avatar's mesh height. But it is not. In Linden Lab viewer the "Height" shown is actually "Agent Height". This agent height is shorter than avatar's mesh height is. So people who adjust their height relying on this value are actually taller than what they think they are. Linden Lab did disservice to the users in naming that thing just "Height". It would have been better if they had left it out altogether - so far until they have found out a way of showing the exact mesh height instead. Some TPV viewers try to show the avatar's mesh height instead of agent height. They use a calculation: they take the agent height and then add a correction factor. They come quite close to the correct mesh height (about within 1 cm to 2 cm). Unfortunately no viewer has a method to measure and show directly the true mesh height. Therefore the only reliable method to get the avatar's mesh is measure with prim.

Aethelwine wrote: Studio09 wrote: I am a noob how do I turn ALM on with Firestorm? Advanced lighting should be one of the settings under preferences and graphics. And in older Firestorm versions it was called: "Lighting & Shadows" Which was a bit misleading because turning that on did not turn also shadows on (as one might suppose). There is separate setting box to turn shadows on too. Anyway, shadows are not needed to see Advanced Lighting effect; which is good because shadows put slowish computers crawling.

Phil Deakins wrote: 1. You are mistaken that there has been any speculation that you have been trying to "force" everyone to be RL heights. But you have been debating in favour of it. You can't force anyone, and nobody even suggested it. 2. Nobody has even suggested that you support that every avatar should be the same height (the bolded sentence in your post), so I don't know why you wrote and emphasised that sentence. 3. You are mistaken if you believe that anyone has stated that RL and SL meters are not the same. What was said (by me) is that, if you treat them as being different, your desire that general avatar heights = general RL people heights is already true, so there is no need to change anyone's mind about avatar heights. 4. You yourself have agreed that things in SL cannot work properly in RL sizes. I.e you agreed that rooms need to be bigger for it to work. But, if rooms are bigger, furniture needs to be bigger to make the rooms look right. And then, of course, avatars need to be bigger to be right for the furniture. 1. I just wanted to make it crystal clear that I'm not trying to force anybody to be anything. I'm not even "persuading" (as you say in your very post I'm replying to) anybody. I just present ideas how I see things, and what methods I think would make SL a more beautiful and coherent place. And I really do think that building to RL scale would be very good step towards that goal. Clear enough? 2. Again just to make it crystal clear that I do not support equal avatar size for everybody. 3. You are playing with words "the meters can be the same" but "treat them as different". (you are an expert in wordplay, sometimes I have to read many times to clearly understand what you have said) 4. I have said that RL sized avatars and objects do work perfectly in SL. You have said so too. We are in agreement regarding that. We both agree that avatars need larger rooms to feel comfortable. I want to point out: Big avatars need large rooms, small avatars need less large rooms than big avatars. Why should small avatars need as large rooms as big avatars? Anyway for both, the rooms would be larger that in RL. Let's suppose a male avatar which is 2.20 m tall would be ok in a room measuring 7 m x 7 m. Then there is mean RL height male avatar 1.74 m tall. What would be suitable room size for it? Surely the big avatar's room would be too large in comparison. To get the exact same feeling for small avatar as the big one has we need to do: Floor length of small avatar's room = (1.74 / 2.20) * 7 = 5.53 Thus for the same room experience: • Big avatar's room 7 m x 7 m • Small avatar's room 5.53 m x 5.53 m Your argument "if rooms are bigger, furniture needs to be bigger to make the rooms look right. And then, of course, avatars need to be bigger to be right for the furniture" is not correct. You are totally wrong in thinking that way. Think very carefully again. You are just going in circles with that statement, and in effect you suggest (unconsiously or knowingly) that the big avatar has reached a size "sweet spot" where everything looks right. Of course you have earlier denied of supporting any "sweet spot" idea. Draw exactly dimensioned layouts from both rooms and furniture, and observe. (Or easier make the large room with large furniture, make a copy, shrink the copy by 1.74/2.20 and there you have the rooms to compare.) We can say that the 7x7 room is all right for the big avatar, and the 5.53x5.53 room is all right for the small avatar. Small avatar is happy with RL sized furniture, big avatar needs larger furniture, fit for its size. Visually inspecting the rooms, the furniture in each of them occupy relatively the same areas from the floors. Phil Deakins wrote: I don't know the purpose for this thread. Sizes in SL works fine as they are so why produce graphs that show RL and SL heights? The SL world is not the RL world. I can only assume that you are still attempting to persuade people to have RL equivalent heights. Why not be like almost all users and accept that SL is not a reflection of the real world and that things are bigger in SL by comparison. Apart from a tiny number of people, it works wonderfully well, whereas SL sizes = RL sizes doesn't work at all unless you abandon part of it - rooms. And finally. The SL world is what it is. It is not the real world. It is the SL world. Individuals can change their part of it for themselves, but, globally, it will always remain what it is, and the best thing that anyone can do is accept that fact. Please don't keep repeating over and over again that SL is not RL. It adds nothing to this discussion. lol [shout on] Coby Foden knows that SL and RL are not the same.[shout off] There! :smileywink: As I said above I'm not trying to persuade anybody to be anything. You could take this as education and an eye opener, things could be different, and in mind better, than what they have been so far. If you travel a lot in SL, by foot and really look at things, you would see that everything is not all right concerning sizing of things. Some designers rely on GAH method (like you). I'm sure that there are many sizes of GAH, there is no globally defined size of GAH. Each designer who relies on GAH naturally have their own estimation of GAH. So GAH method in designing is not accurate. Things all over SL are not scaled equally. Some designers make large things, some make even larger things. And anything in between. There are designers who actually do use meters (surprise!). But most them of scale up things like the GAH people. Some scale up by 1.5, some might scale up by 2.0. And again anything in between. In my mind this is not a very good thing. It makes SL to like some topsy turvy place. Nothing is exact. Keen eye notices this easily. If you stay mostly in the same place always, everything could look "okey'ish". But travelling all over SL gives a different picture how things are. Your view that "we should accept things as they are" sounds pessimistic to me. Why should we accept it as we know that things could be better? I would be very happy to see that SL was more consistent and thus more beautiful than what it is today. Phil Deakins wrote: ETA: A question: since the sizes in SL have worked perfectly well for many years, why would people en masse suddenly want to change everything to RL-equivalent sizes? In the other thread, it was suggested that mesh clothes and LI might cause a general reduction is sizes, but someone in this thread suggested that it wouldn't (that's how I read it, anyway). If it does cause a reduction, so be it, but persuading the population to go down to RL-equivalent sizes, just so that a very tiny number of people can be satisfied, isn't going to happen. It's a genuine question though, Coby. Why would the population want to reduce everything to RL-equivalent sizes? What benefit would there be in doing it? To date, I don't think I've ever seen you say why it's a good idea - only that you prefer it. So please tell me why you think it's a good idea for avatars in general to be the equivalent heights of RL people. The sizes in SL have not worked perfectly well for many years. It is just how you have observed things. I have observed things differently. Avatar of any size can see that content in SL is not equally scaled. It's not "perfect" situation. How soon or how late mesh content will trigger reducing of sizes depends on do people care about LI savings using RL sized content. The savings in LI and in land area are not miniscule - they do have meaningful size. But it's up to general population and designers. It is interesting to observe what will happen. If you haven't seen me state the benefits of RL sizing earlier then you have not read all my posts thoroughly. It's not that "I just prefer it". To state clearly the benefits what I see in RL sizing: • LI and land area savings using mesh content -- lower LI means that people could decorate their homes with more objects than would be the case with large upscaled ojects • In prim content land area saving --- instead of that house occupies the whole parcel, with smaller house one could have nice small garden • Consistent scaling of things (Means using: 1 SLm = 1 RLm) • More beautiful SL experience for everybody • If Linden Lab finally could find a way to tell the true mesh height in appearance editor: -- no more confusion about avatar heights (now the situation is a chaos: different viewers give different heights, measuring with prim is the only accurate one) Again, I'm not trying to persuade people to change anything. Take this as a fun reading how things could be instead of how they are now. Happy SLing all, thanks for reading. :smileyhappy: :heart:

I hope that Phil reads Pamela's post - carefully and open mindedly. :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileywink:

Perrie Juran wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: With the best will in the world, I can't see that many people would be happy to have their avatar covering so much of the view as the norm, Jo. I'm going to agree with this. I prefer being able to watch my sexy Martian ass wiggle as I walk. I'm in the same boat Perrie. :smileyvery-happy: One of my preferred view is low camera, but far enough so that I can see the whole avatar. Well, I'm not very much interested about the ass wiggle as such. But seeing the whole avatar serves a purpose in some occasions - we spend a lot of money on clothes and of course it is nice to see a long gown completely in it's glory while dancing - for example. Then closer view comes handy in other some circumstances. My display is 24 inch, resolution 1920 x 1200. I have never had any feeling that the avatar would cover too much the view in any of my preferred camera locations. It could became an issue with lower resolution screens. I chose on purpose my 24 inch widescreen display with 16:10 aspect ratio and resolution of 1920 x 1200. I find that for general computing (and for Second Life) it is better than those displays with 16:9 aspect ratio and 1920 x 1080 resolution which is the norm for HD TV. I don't use my computer as TV, so HD TV aspect ratio is not optimal for me - 16:10 is. The Extra vertical pixels one gets with 16:10 aspect ratio compared to 16:9 displays do mean a lot in computing. It's still widescreen; not at all like the horizontally cramped old style 4:3 ratio displays were.

Phil Deakins wrote: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Cut-Mesh-Prims-by-Changing-Your-Camera-Angle/td-p/2054145/page/2 Halfway down that page. I was probably wrong but I assumed it was your place. I'll answer your question anyway, even though you know my answer It's because the default camera position is what people actually use.in general. Thanks for the link Phil. Well, that is not my house. That house was located at http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Sailors%20Cove/116/166/22 . As you can see from the photos, it was totally empty house, all doors wide open, so I thought it's no disturbance nor intrusion of privasy to quickly take two shots there. Why I was there anyway? Well, I very often start my sailing tours from that place. Interesting islands all around and it's connected to Blake Sea. I checked today the place and the parcel where the house was is empty now. Psst.... please be careful in assuming something. Assumptions don't work very well. :smileywink: By the way, did you notice how with default camera view (the second image) all vertical lines are not vertical? All badly tilted due to the high camera location. Compare it with the first image where I have one of my preferred camera settings - all vertical lines are vertical - perfect! In small places I can use other setting where the camera is much closer to the avatar. Works like a charm. And if the place is really small I can use advanced movement and camera controls to not to stumble on something at my feet. Works perfectly again - it is not awkward at all. For those who have played games using advanced movement and camera controls is like a second nature. So if you find it awkward - it is indeed so, you find it difficult. We cannot make reliable estimations how many SL users find it difficult or easy. I guessed right what would your answer be for the default camera location. Yay! :smileyvery-happy:

Phil Deakins wrote: You're a bit late to this party, Jo ... and you can have avatars in them IF they drastically change their camera positions AND use 2 hands to negotiate the furniture, but even then it's just too darned awkward and simply isn't anything like the way people get around rooms in RL or in SL. That's why I say it doesn't work. It's so forced that it cannot be the norm. You can do it as novelty, of course, but that's all. Even Coby, who was the one arguing on the RL-equivalent side, agreed that rooms need to be "slightly bigger", but she wouldn't say how slightly bigger they need to be, even though I asked several times. However, I've now seen a screenshot of her room - in another thread - and it's big. The word "slightly" is totally foreign to it. Phil, why are you always referring to the default camera position in your arguments? Is it something "YOU SHALL NOT CHANGE IT!" or what? (I already know your answer.) :smileywink: To my knowledge I have not posted any screenshots of my room to the forums. Can you give link where it is. I will check is it mine or not. (Fear of dementia suddenly struck me!) :matte-motes-sick:

Ceka Cianci wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: How did I become the sole-named subject of this post when I only made a few posts in the other thread??? when she said..i need one volunteer!! you didn't notice..but the rest of us all took a step back.. Ceka is right. The situation was similar to this one:

Hmm... interesting. :smileysurprised: It might be a good idea to start avoiding women with that height then? Or at least making an effort trying to speak to them softly so that they would not be upset in any way... But then again, speaking too softly might trigger the said characteristic to surface! :smileywink:

Syo Emerald wrote: Oh great...So I have the high of a man in RL, because I'm not under 1.70m? :catindifferent: Nothing to worry about Syo. If the data was collected in Netherlands (there were news just recently that the Dutch are generally the tallest people in Europe) I'm sure you that would be clearly and safely be on female side on that Bell curve. :smileyhappy:

Perrie Juran wrote: And as far as I know, ALM is not enabled by default until you set to "ultra." In latest Linden Lab viewer Second Life 3.6.4 (280048) you can enable Advanced Lighting Model when the graphics are in the middle between "Mid" and "High". So no need for Ultra setting. And there is no need to enable shadows. In my computer enabling ALM has only very minimal effect to fps. In practise the effect is so small that one can notice it only by looking at the actual fps number while alternating between ALM on and ALM off. When I installed this viewer ALM was on by default. This whether it is on or by default depends on the computer capabilies.

Annie Rubanis wrote: What I've noticed, on these blogs, is a specific body type. Sadly, it's a body type I've always found odd in SL but that's just personal preference. The avatar has wide hips and skinny legs that you could drive a train through. They almost always have big, puffy downturned pouty lips. Does anyone know the type of shape i'm talking about? We sure do know them. :smileysurprised: :smileyfrustrated: :smileywink: I would advice to avoid them like plague. There are nice proper human shapes available. It's not extremely hard to learn make one's own shape. It needs practise, motivation to learn it and good understanding about proper human proportions.

Because there have been speculations that I am trying to ”force” (lol) everybody ”to be the same as me” especially concerning avatar heights, I decided to clarify things here a bit. First of all I want to point out that I do support using meters as the sole accurate measurement system that should be used in SL in content creation. And yes, it should be seen as one to one correlation: 1 meter in SL equals exactly to 1 meter in RL. Any other definition just shows ignorance. We could use any name for SL meter, say ”Unit” for short ”u”. Even then it should be seen as 1 u = 1 RL meter. There are many unrefutable benefits in content creation in seeing the SL measurement unit this way. Ok, let's go to avatar heights. First of all what are the human heights? There are many studies about this. For example one is here: Human population height variations [Quote from the page] Demographic data from the USA. Men have a median height of 5′ 8.5″ (174 cm), women have a median height of 5′ 3.5″ (162 cm). [Unquote] The results are shown in Bell curve: Note: Data has been collected from about 120 000 women and about 110 000 men. Should be good enough sample size for anybody. See, everybody in RL is not exactly the same height in RL. Isn't that nice! Nor should avatars be exactly the same as any other avatar in SL. Please note carefully (thanks): :matte-motes-smile: I have never supported or spread such silly idea that every avatar should be the same size. Let's see how the Bell curve distribution would work in avatars. Just for a mind experiment let's suppose: • The appearance editor would show the true mesh height of an avatar instead of ”Agent Height” • Default male avatar would be exactly 174 cm tall • Default female avatar would be exactly 162 cm tall • All content would have been made to the sizes what they would be in RL (using 1 RLm = 1 SLm naturally!) (Side note: Houses would be larger than in RL, they are cheap in SL, avatars like larger houses. BUT: the houses should not be unrealistically huge. There is no reason for that, especially because the avatar heights would be according to RL human heights. Smaller avatars, smaller content needed.) Would that have meant that every male avatar in SL would have been exactly 174 cm and every female avatar exactly 162 cm? Of course not. People do tweak their avatars. I suppose that many would have liked to make their avatars the same height what they are in RL. Then there are people who are short in RL and they might want to use somewhat taller avatar. And vice versa. All natural choices. I'm quite confident that the avatar population heights in SL would have been pretty close to those Bell curves derived from human population. At present the avatar height Bell curves lie far away to the right from RL Bell curves. The median for avatar heights might be at 200 cm or even further. (This shows that SL is ridden with acromegaly and gigantism - no cure implemented so far due to resistance from those who like it.) So, with RL sizing everybody would be happy. No complaints in the forums about avatar and content sizes. (This post would have not been needed to weite either.) Everything would look nice and consistent in sizes and relative scales. It would not happen anymore that when somebody gives you a cup of coffee you suddenly find some soup bowl on your hand. Czari could make her avatar the same size as she is in RL, and she would look tall – what she likes – among other avatars. Naturally she could make herself even taller. With RL sized mesh content we could decorate our land and houses with more items than would be case with grossly oversized similar content. Grossly oversized prim content hogs land area – grossly oversized mesh content hogs land area and LI. With RL sizing of content everybody would win. Unfortunately there are still many – possibly a lot – of designers who rely on inaccurate GAH method of sizing in creating their content. They just support to continue and spread even more the present chaos in content sizes and relative scales of things. Which is a real pity. Do they not want anything better really? I wonder.

Because there have been speculations that I am trying to ”force” (lol) everybody ”to be the same as me” especially concerning avatar heights, I decided to clarify things here a bit. First of all I want to point out that I do support using meters as the sole accurate measurement system that should be used in SL in content creation. And yes, it should be seen as one to one correlation: 1 meter in SL equals exactly to 1 meter in RL. Any other definition just shows ignorance. We could use any name for SL meter, say ”Unit” for short ”u”. Even then it should be seen as 1 u = 1 RL meter. There are many unrefutable benefits in content creation in seeing the SL measurement unit this way. Ok, let's go to avatar heights. First of all what are the human heights? There are many studies about this. For example one is here: Human population height variations [Quote from the page] Demographic data from the USA. Men have a median height of 5′ 8.5″ (174 cm), women have a median height of 5′ 3.5″ (162 cm). [Unquote] The results are shown in Bell curve: Note: Data has been collected from about 120 000 women and about 110 000 men. Should be good enough sample size for anybody. See, everybody in RL is not exactly the same height in RL. Isn't that nice! Nor should avatars be exactly the same as any other avatar in SL. Please note carefully (thanks): :matte-motes-smile: I have never supported or spread such silly idea that every avatar should be the same size. Let's see how the Bell curve distribution would work in avatars. Just for a mind experiment let's suppose: • The appearance editor would show the true mesh height of an avatar instead of ”Agent Height” • Default male avatar would be exactly 174 cm tall • Default female avatar would be exactly 162 cm tall • All content would have been made to the sizes what they would be in RL (using 1 RLm = 1 SLm naturally!) (Side note: Houses would be larger than in RL, they are cheap in SL, avatars like larger houses. BUT: the houses should not be unrealistically huge. There is no reason for that, especially because the avatar heights would be according to RL human heights. Smaller avatars, smaller content needed.) Would that have meant that every male avatar in SL would have been exactly 174 cm and every female avatar exactly 162 cm? Of course not. People do tweak their avatars. I suppose that many would have liked to make their avatars the same height what they are in RL. Then there are people who are short in RL and they might want to use somewhat taller avatar. And vice versa. All natural choices. I'm quite confident that the avatar population heights in SL would have been pretty close to those Bell curves derived from human population. At present the avatar height Bell curves lie far away to the right from RL Bell curves. The median for avatar heights might be at 200 cm or even further. (This shows that SL is ridden with acromegaly and gigantism - no cure implemented so far due to resistance from those who like it.) So, with RL sizing everybody would be happy. No complaints in the forums about avatar and content sizes. (This post would have not been needed to weite either.) Everything would look nice and consistent in sizes and relative scales. It would not happen anymore that when somebody gives you a cup of coffee you suddenly find some soup bowl on your hand. Czari could make her avatar the same size as she is in RL, and she would look tall – what she likes – among other avatars. Naturally she could make herself even taller. With RL sized mesh content we could decorate our land and houses with more items than would be case with grossly oversized similar content. Grossly oversized prim content hogs land area – grossly oversized mesh content hogs land area and LI. With RL sizing of content everybody would win. Unfortunately there are still many – possibly a lot – of designers who rely on inaccurate GAH method of sizing in creating their content. They just support to continue and spread even more the present chaos in content sizes and relative scales of things. Which is a real pity. Do they not want anything better really? I wonder.