Coby Foden

Alyx Enderfield wrote: i have found out that i can be much shorter and much more child like if i wanted to, all i wish is that these places to lower the minimum height limit, oh and by the way, my height is close to my RL height measurements. I find it really odd that some places use height as an indication of age. What are those people thinking of, I wonder. :matte-motes-agape: :smileyfrustrated: I have seen mesh avatars under one metre (about three feet) tall which look like adults. Nobody would claim that they look like children. With mesh it is possible to create even much tinier avatars and give them the looks of an adult. Thus, using height as an indicator of age has no sense at all. Naturally the place owner(s) have the right to eject anybody, for any reason, or no reason at all, if they so wish. Anyway, one would wish that the reason would be rational reason.

Phil Deakins wrote: An aside. A common fault with proportions that I've found over the years is the arms being much too short. .... Often, the av's fingertips are up by their hips. And I'm told that even some Library shapes are like that. Indeed, that is one of the very common mistakes in avatars. One problem with tall female shapes is that it is impossible to make long enough arms for them because the slider value reaches its maximum before the arms are long enough. In male shape this problem does not exist. Short female avies can adjust the arm length to be long enough. But tall female avies are in trouble. The arms will be too short. Which looks very bad. I often think to myself seeing short armed avatar "that avatar needs a helping hand in toilet to clean herself because she cannot reach where she should.." :matte-motes-big-grin-squint: lol

Phil Deakins wrote: If you put a typically sized chair in the shot, then their relative heights would become obvious, but if each were alone in the shot, they would all look quite normal heights. Well, the shortest woman (yes, that's me) is 1.70 metres tall. The guy, my friend, is about 1.75 metres tall. Once a long time ago we wanted to experiment how the small avatars would look and work in SL environment. It happened that we were on a teasing joking mood. So we placed ourselves beside many of the very tall ones and snapped lots of photos. :matte-motes-evil: :smileytongue: :smileylol: After experimenting, to our great surprise, we found that the small avatars function really well in SL. Especially so when things are made to the realistic scale too. As the scale of things in SL is what it is, we made a compromise in our heights. Now I use most often 1.80 metres tall shape and my friend's shape is around 1.87 metres. I have never since felt the need to use any taller avatar. These sizes don't look like midgets among the giants. The oversized furniture often seen, still looks grossly oversized though. But small avatar hops easily on those. :smileywink: PS. Phil, you cannot be serious in saying that the woman on the left "looks quite realistically proportioned". Look at her extremely long legs! You can easily see the faults in her proportions if you put a photo of RL woman beside her and compare them. Seeing lots of disproprotioned human avatar shapes in SL tends to blind the eyes from seeing the truth, what is right and what is wrong. One must rest one's eyes on RL photos to teach them what is a good shape.

Oh, I found some older SL snapshots from my disk. Here's one appropriate to this thread. :smileysurprised: :smileytongue: Surely those tall avatars need bigger houses and furniture than the smaller, real life scaled ones do. Big ones need big items. Smaller ones are happy with smaller items. PS. Please note how realistic humans the smaller ones look. Adults with good proportions. The tall ones are from some alien planet with strange proportions. :smileyindifferent: (Ah, no offence to the tall ones if somebody recognizes them as their own avatar...)

My friend once had an AO hud where there was a function which allowed him to animate other avatars without asking the object avatar any permission to animate. The HUD just animated the object avatar, but the object avatar still could move away from the hug, kiss or whatever the animation was. However, even if one could move, the animation continued so long until the HUD owner stopped the animation. Maybe what you experienced was something similar to this.

Phil Deakins wrote: Coby Foden wrote: I have kept my camera location, now for over one year, in a lot lower location than the viewer default is. Just out of interest, how close to the back of your head is your camera? It's the distance behind that makes RL-size rooms too small. The default for CameraOffsetRearView in the viewers are: x = -3.000 y = 0.000 z = 0.750 For me, I generally use: x = -3.700 y = 0.000 z = 0.100 So the camera is much lower than the viewer default. For general use I keep the X = -3.700 because I want to perv my whole avatar in view when walking, lol :smileytongue: My avatar is 1.803 metres, (5.915 feet) as measured by prim. In small places I lower the X value, even to X = -2.000 which works great in realistically sized houses. If I used even smaller avatar, like 1.6 metres, I could easily use even closer X value without feeling that I'm eating the avatar hair. So as the camera is adjustable I really don't see the need to build up to 1.25 or 1.5 times bigger. When the avatar is very tall, close camera does not work well as the big avatar begins to block the view. Big avatar needs the camera to be further away (but not that high anyway as the viewer default is). With smaller avatar, the camera can be closer (if one wants to keep it close, not perving the whole avatar..). It's as simple as that. I went to 1920s Berlin sim which is built to realistic RL scale. http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/1920s%20Berlin/55/59/26 I used CameraOffsetRearView settings: x = -2.000 y = -0.100 z = 0.000 I had no difficulties in roaming around there with my 1.803 tall avatar in the small rooms. Worked perfectly. With even smaller avatar (like 1.6 metres) it will work great. There are other camera settings to play with too, as Nova told in her post.

Phil Deakins wrote: ETA: One more thing. In the SL world there are all sorts of animals that move around on 2 feet and talk, there are martians (hi Perrie), there are humans, there are all sorts of beings, not to mention all sorts of objects that don't exist in the real world. The SL world is not a copy of the RL world, so why try to think of it as a copy? It doesn't make sense to me. Sure Phil, there are all kinds of creatures in SL. Tiny ones, big ones, huge ones. Which is very nice indeed as it adds variety and "awsomeness" to this virtual world. However the slogan "Your World - Your Imagination" should not be interpreted as "Your World - Your Random Whatever Inconsistent Scale". <-- (Here I'm referring to items in regard to human avatars and things for them.) Right, SL is not a copy of RL. Nevertheless what SL lacks now is consistent scale. One designer uses whatever random scale which they think would look good. Other designer uses their random scale what they think looks ok. So, the end result is that SL is filled with randomly scaled things. This is not a good thing as I already mentioned earlier.

Nova Convair wrote: Coby Foden wrote: It can be adjusted, a new default can be put in all viewers (if there is a will). In addition to the third person view it is possible to add also good first person view (if Linden Lab is willing to do so) which works well in small places. There is absolutely no reason to do this and theres is no will to do this. By the way - suggestions like this try to force that sight of things on everyone. There is very good reason to do this. The present default camera location is a design flaw by a bad decision which has been made in the past. I have kept my camera location, now for over one year, in a lot lower location than the viewer default is. With that setting, the perspective of the world and the things in it, is much better than with the default setting. The perspective looks a lot more natural. At first this new view might look a bit strange. But after a while, there is no going back to the default view. The new view is so much better. When I try the viewer default location, the world looks weird with distorted perspective. What else can a "camera on a tree top view" produce than a distorted perspective? This distorted perspective is also one cause which enhances the need to make and use oversized human avatars, because you are looking at yourself in steep angle from behind. Just look at the many ladies with crasshopper like very long legs. Distorted view tends to produce distorted avatars. PS. I'm not trying to "force" anything. Just making suggestions how the SL world could look better in perspective and in consistent scale. :smileywink:

Sassy Romano wrote: not accurate Monti. Rigged mesh can still be modify as far as textures and other object attributes but it cannot be changed in shape it size...yet. Right Sassy. I wonder why a lot of rigged mesh items are no mod? Aren't all designers aware that rigged mesh can be set to be modifiable? Modify permission has an advantage that if we want to tint the color, for example, then we can do it. Naturally we cannot resize modifiable rigged mesh, but we can tweak other attributes. For me in most cases, no mod (and also no copy) equals to no buy.

There might be a good number of people still who have no idea what mesh is. Yesterday I was kindly IMed by a gentleman saying "Psst... Coby, I think that you are wearing unopened item. I can see a box on your foot." Well, it was not a box but lovely pair of rigged mesh bare feet. :smileyvery-happy: I explained it to him and told that he should upgrade his viewer to be able to see mesh. He was happy with this piece of information and replied "I will do that". I just hope that his computer will be able to run mesh viewer. Oh, by the way, he was not a newbie, almost two years in SL and yet unaware of mesh.

Phil Deakins wrote: Bear in mind that adjusting the camera position isn't an option. It has to work with the default. Phil, why are you so stubborn with the default camera position? And insist on building things bigger because of the bad default camera position? Why changing it is not an option in your mind? It can be adjusted, a new default can be put in all viewers (if there is a will). In addition to the third person view it is possible to add also good first person view (if Linden Lab is willing to do so) which works well in small places. I agree to some extent, as avatars are clumsy in movement, that a bit bigger rooms than in RL would be nice. But I don't agree to your view that everything must be built bigger. It just isn't true. Which fact you can check in places which actually are built to RL scale. Naturally you need to wear RL sized avatar and have adjusted your viewer's default camera settings before you can enjoy the RL sized things. RL sized things do work in SL, there is no question about it. What is totally silly in present situation is that some designers make designs in 1:1 scale, some make things 1.25 times bigger, some make things 1.5 times bigger. Some might make them even bigger. Thus the scale of things is not consistent. Which is not so nice thing when you explore places a lot.

Lexie Linden wrote: Fixed! :smileywink: Yay! Thank you. :heart: :smileyhappy: :heart:

vampira Diabolito wrote: My avatar is invisible from the waist dow. I tried looking for any potential alpha layers causing this but nothing shows up. Please someone help me!!!! Sometimes tattoo layers cause also problem so that rebake does not work. Remove all tattoo layers and do a rebake (Ctrl-Alt-R). If that does not help change your hairbase and rebake again. Sometimes it helps if your teleport to other sim. Blake Sea has lots of low lag water sims. If after doing the above you can put on the tattoo layers again. However, tattoo layers might cause the same problem later again (it's a bug in software).

If you are wearing prim hair it might be that some prim from the hair sticks through the eye. Remove the hair and see if there is still problem with the eye. If the problem dissappears after removing the hair, then the hair was the reason. Just put the hair back on again and adjust it a bit so that the prim does not stick through the eye.

For many days I have not seen emoticons in the forums. What I can see is only the descriptive emoticon text, but not the emoticon graphics itself. I have even tried with different browers, the same result. Emoticons broken here? :smileyindifferent: :smileyfrustrated: :smileysurprised: :matte-motes-crying: Like above, I can see only the text. Hmm.. anybody seeing the same? Broken? Hey, give them back.

What Second Life would need is: • 1. Good natural default third person view • 2. Good default first person view (mouselook does not serve as a good first person view) • 3. Both should be easily adjustable on the fly by the user without needing to go to Debug Settings • 4. User should be able to switch between third person view and first person view easily by pressing a key • 5. And finally, realistically sized default avatars It is silly that the bad default camera view is compensated by making everything bigger. With good third person view and good first person view there would be no need for this sillyness. As can be seen in many games. For some odd reason the good default views and consistent scale have not been implemented in Second Life. Which is very strange. (Yes, beating the so called "dead horse" again.. which is far from dead untill this is issue is resolved, by the way..)

When designing rigged clothes to be used with the mesh deformer, Qarl said that the default shapes will be the following: Female shape: In the viewer create new shape • New Body Parts, New Shape • Then in the appearance editor select "Female" (actually this is on by default) Male shape: In the viewer create new shape • New Body Parts, New Shape • Then in the appearance editor Select "Male". Save Qarl's blog about the deformer (where comments can be added): http://www.qarl.com/qLab/?p=80 I created the above shapes, then I listed all the appearance editor values for both of them. The appearance editor values for both female and male shapes are listed in this file: http://cobyfoden.weebly.com/uploads/2/6/8/1/2681906/sl-body-shapes_defaults.pdf What I don't know is, that are these exact shapes dowloadable anywhere? One could use Phoenix viewer version 1.5.2.1185 to export the above shapes. Wear the shape, and then from the menu: "Advanced, Character, Meshes and Morphs". Do the same for the female and the male shape. (By the way, I noticed that in Phoenix version 1.6.0.1600 this is not any more possible, at least I didn't find the "Meshes and Morphs" menu item there, maybe I'm blind..).

Kelli May wrote: Clearly my avatar is some kind of distorted freak In fact, I consider my avatar to be realistically proportioned: Kelli, that body looks really great. It's like a real female body with nice balanced pleasant proportions. Excellent superb job, yay! :smileyhappy:

Phil Deakins wrote: So everything in SL has to be bigger than RL. It's why rooms and furniture are bigger. And if you make your av the same height as your RL self, you'll feel really tiny in any typical SL home. If a sofa is made to typical RL sizes, it would look so tiny in a room as to be ridiculous. Everything does not need to be bigger in SL than in RL. There are many many examples in SL which show that RL scale works perfectly well in SL and looks great. The default camera location can be adjusted to a better position, it's not locked. It's strange idea that everything should be made bigger because of the default camera location. Gigantissimus feeds gigantissimus. PS Phil, I checked your inworld shop. You have nice furniture there, but unfortunately all of them suffer from the "gigantissimus" infection. Everything was too big for me. Anyway, the positive side was that I saw that they are modifiable, so one can adjust their size to suit one's avatar and house. :smileyhappy:

I'm female, my height reported by different measurements is: 1.803 meters (5.915 feet) <-- measured with prim 1.820 meters (5.971 feet) <-- Phoenix/Firestorm 1.620 meters (5.315 feet) <-- Linden Lab viewer This 1.803 meters prim height works pretty well for me in all surroundings. Among the giant avatars and also in surroundings designed close to real world measurements. I can say that for me this height is a "happy medium". I have no difficulties in finding well fitting clothes. Often only very slight adjustment of the prim clothes would be needed. It seems to me that it's the giants (very tall ones with huge hips, bums and breasts) are the ones who will find it more difficult to find fitting clothes. I have also still shorter shape about 1.65 meters prim height (5.413 feet). This looks like an adult woman too, but among the giant avatars it looks very small. So as a compromise most often I use the 1.803 meters tall shape. All shapes are based on the same pre-existing default shape. You will get the default shape when in the viewer you do "New Body Parts, New Shape". The differences come only from how the appearance sliders have been adjusted.

Bree Giffen wrote: But returning to the topic, I used to be very tall for close to a year. I decided one day to recreate the room where my computer was. It would be cool to sit at my computer in SL and look around my room. So I measured out the walls, the table, my chair, etc. and converted everything to meters and started building. Let's just say that my avatar could not fit through the door, my eye level was above the ceiling, I could not sit on such a tiny chair and table! It was a real eye opening moment. I imagined if my avatar were real and in my room. She would not be a tall person but a mythical giant. After I resized my avatar to a realistic height everything looked well. I had to resize all of my attachments but it was surprising that my avatar could look the same on a smaller scale. From there, I eventually grew up to 6ft tall over the years but I'll never go back to anything taller. I'm glad to hear about your positive experiment Bree. I do hope that more content creators would do the same. Build to realistic scale. The result might well be that the ridiculously big human avatars would start dissappering gradually as they could not find a house, or a vehicle anywhere where they could fit in. Yay! :matte-motes-evil-grin: :smileyhappy:

This thread reminds me of Don Quixote tilting at windmills. :smileyfrustrated: :smileylol: ("Tilting at windmills" is an English idiom which means attacking imaginary enemies, or fighting unwinnable or futile battles.) Lonewolf, why not accept the facts and end your futile crusade? Whatever you try to prove here will not change anything as your "proofs" are totally misguided. The facts are not arguable. Thanks. :matte-motes-yawn:

I was sailing one day and as it often happens in sim crossings, something went bad. I was thrown into sim corner and I was logged out. Luckily I had mermaid outfit on with gills, so I didn't drown. :smileysurprised: :smileyvery-happy: When I logged back in, this last screen greeted me:

My name selection took quite a long time. I knew that this will be my name forever in SL. I wanted it to be short, easy to remember, first name must rhyme well with the last name. So, I looked first what last names there were available. Some where very strange, some where nice. I chose few nice ones, typed them in a notepad. Hmm... what first name should I use? I googled first names used in various countries. Again I selected some nice ones what I liked, typed them in a notepad. Then the difficult task: compare different first names with different last names. Which combinations look nice and rhyme well. Thinking, looking, thinking, looking (hmm... what time is it, how long I've been doing this? :smileytongue:). Finally I made my decision: Coby Foden I will be! Yes. :smileyvery-happy: PS. Much later I found out that in one European country they give name Coby to cows. :smileyfrustrated: But nevetherless I'm still happy with my name. :smileywink:

Ceka Cianci wrote: so then the firestorm one is probably better to go by? well 5'7" isn't so bad i guess.. i think if i were to go down to 5'1" that may be too small for me then.. if i were to go any smaller..maybe 5'5" at the most would be as small as i would go..but i like my height now ..so i guess that's the important thing hehehehe Yes indeed, as you can see from the chart Firestorm and Phoenix are telling very close the correct mesh height. I once made my avatar 1.6 meters (5' 3") tall. Unfortunately it really looked a tad too small amongst the giants. So I made a compromise, I made my avatar 1.8 meters (5' 11") tall. A bit tallish for RL woman. In SL it generally works pretty well even among the giants, they don't step on me anymore accidentally. :smileywink: This size still looks like a petit woman and it fits well also to small places. :smileyhappy: As you say, the important thing is that we like the height what we have and feel comfortable with it.