Fluffy Sharkfin
-
Posts
1,107 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Fluffy Sharkfin
-
-
Here's a couple of old prim builds from yesteryear that are among my favourites.
This is a random build (189 prims) that sprang out of me experimenting with prims one lazy sunday afternoon.
I think the thing I loved most about this one was the way the moon in the center would "burst into flames" each time the SL sun came up and the particle system triggered.
My other favourite is the willow tree (188 prims) which was made during the first week that flexiprims were introduced to the main grid.
The entire thing is made from cylinders and torii with flexiprim leaves, and about 90% of the time it took to make was spent trying to align the seamless texture on the branches.
-
5
-
-
Back in 2004 when I first signed up the impression I got when reading various sites was that SL was a sort of unpolished, creative, chaotic attempt at a virtual world/community, and that's pretty much exactly what I found when I logged in for the first time. The information that I'd found led me to the conclusion that SL was a place where curiosity and a desire to learn and experiment were beneficial, and having an imagination and interest in creativity would provide a constant source of entertainment and fun (i.e. a mindset that was ideal for starting out in SL, navigating the UI, learning to create and generally keeping yourself amused).
It's been a long while since LL marketed Second Life in a way that's a realistic representation of what the platform actually is rather than what they wish it was. They either need to be more honest in their marketing approach and choose a target audience that's more likely to have the required curiosity, patience, determination, etc to get over the initial hurdles of the UI and SLs lack of "goals" & structure that people are used to in regular games, or they need to just pick a demographic and work out how to tailor the "SL experience" to better suit that target audience.
-
@imacrabpinch As Optimo points out above, using the Lattice Deformer tool is probably the easiest way to refit your meshes to different bodies.
One of the benefits of the Lattice Deformer (in Maya at least) is that you can detach and reattach different lattices to your model. So once you create a set of lattice deformers that adjust the overall shape of a model to fit the bodies you're working with you can export them and then reload and apply them to other models.
In the majority of cases you'll still need to make additional adjustments afterwards since each model will have different dimensions and topology so its very rare that the same lattice will work perfectly for two different models, but it does cut down on the amount of time you need to spend adjusting each model compared to having to creating a new lattice for each article of clothing you make.
-
Broken Mesh
in Mesh
23 minutes ago, OptimoMaximo said:It seems like the mesh has more than 3 values for its vertices coordinates.
Pretty sure it's an issue with the python code, or more likely the steps being taking before running said code (possibly selecting the wrong objects or wrong number of objects), rather than with the model itself.
Quote"ValueError: too many values to unpack."
This error is caused when there are more values in whatever is being unpacked than the amount of variables you have specified to be read into. The solution is to specify a matching number of variables to be read into as are being unpacked.
-
31 minutes ago, animats said:
That's called "auto retopology".
No it's not....
31 minutes ago, animats said:It's relatively new, since about 2015,
No, it's REALLY not!
(unless you're trying to suggest that auto-retopology is new but we've had time travel technology since 2011, which was when the above video was posted)!?
-
1
-
-
Just now, Love Zhaoying said:
I hope they do, I don't want to be cloned without permission! Are you sure that copyrighted GMO products don't count?
Well I guess we could try modelling a strand of DNA from a GMO product and upload it to SL then wait for the DMCAs to start rolling in?
Seriously though, as far as the natural world around us goes there really is no intellectual property rights to worry about which is one of the things I like most about doing environment/prop design, it really saves a lot of time when it comes to tracking down the original creator of concept art, etc to ask permission before recreating things in 3D.
-
2 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:
I stole DNA from my mom and dad. Hope they don't come after me for it!
Don't worry, I'm pretty sure they haven't extended copyright laws to DNA.... yet!
-
2 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:
Neither can most of us, believe me. And trust me, we do nothing but marvel.
I can quite believe it. I try very hard not to judge others based on their political leanings or beliefs but solely on the way in which they treat others , and in the case of what's going on in America right now I can only sympathize with anyone caught in the middle and hope that one day soon people will come to their senses and realize they have far more in common than what separates them, it saddens me deeply to see any group of people so divided!
-
4
-
-
Just now, Phorumities said:
Its already happened. Trump supporters have been harassed in businesses and told to leave. I guess thats okey because Trump supporters are the "bad guys".
Why is it that the people on the left, those champions of tolerance and acceptance are the most racist hateful people in America today?
I wouldn't know, since I'm neither a democrat nor an american I'm afraid I have very little understanding of what fuels the apparent blind hatred that seems to be consuming your country and can only sit and marvel at the senselessness of it all!
-
3
-
-
I'd imagine if you were to put up such a sign a large majority of people, democrat or otherwise, would be more than happy to respect your wishes and avoid your store, given the current political climate and your apparent desire to further provoke animosity and conflict!
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, ChinRey said:
Yes, I probably would do that too. I've never really thought about it because all the "for resale" commissions I've had so far have had such detailed specs I didn't want my name as creator anyway.
Yeah, if the design is someone else's and all you're doing is recreating that design in mesh it feels almost dishonest in a way to have your name listed as the "creator" of the actual object.
-
3
-
-
4 minutes ago, ChinRey said:
I do that kind of work myself. If I have a commission job where the specs are so detailed there's hardly anything creative for me to add (usually that means something the client made from prims), I will actually insist that the client uploads it in their name. I get paid for the time I spend converting their build into SL friendly mesh and once that job is done, I'm done.
If the specs are more general and require some interpretation, it's a bit trickier. Technically those builds are collective works but an SL item can only have one creator listed. Usually I leave it to the client to decide and most of the time they don't care either way. Those items have always been one-off custom builds though, never intended for resale.
On the odd occasions that I take commissions for custom work I usually prefer that the person I'm creating the item for upload it themselves if it's something that they intend to sell (and in the case of scripts will often encourage them to copy the contents of the script into a script of their own), since it can be confusing for the end user and I'd rather avoid getting customer support requests for items that are being sold by other people.
Many years ago when I ran a store of my own selling vendors and other scripted gadgets I would get IMs from people asking questions about items that I didn't even sell because they'd checked the General Tab in the build window and confused the creator of the vendor with its owner.
-
5 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:
Just noting that "work for hire" would deliver the active files to the person hiring and they would upload (and do :D). Don't want folks to think that just because a creator's name is on the product that they made it themselves. It is still legit. Personally, I don't mind that either.
Yes, I see nothing wrong with hiring other SL creators to help with a heavy workload, or even contacting content developers not associated with SL and hiring them to create unique 3D models or negotiating a license to use the items they've created within SL is perfectly acceptable, and in fact makes very good business sense in my opinion.
-
9 minutes ago, ChinRey said:
Yes.
But I have to point out that the case Pamela started the thread with (and many others I know of but won't mention) is different because:
- The merchant lied. She claimed she had made the item herself when in fact all the work she had done was upload it to SL
- The merchant was not involved in the production/creative process in any way. Stradivarius may not have done the work himself but he decided what work needed to be done and he made sure it was done to his specs. That's exactly what the big brands who use hired modellers and riggers do.
- The merchant broke the law. She violated the real creator's and the original seller's IP rights by uploading the item to SL and by reselling it.
Absolutely! The case mentioned in Pamelas original post is pretty clear cut, and there really is no viable excuse for what the creator in question has done. Uploading and selling content that's covered by an existing TOS that disallows upload of said content to SL and then, even worse, claiming that it's your own original work is pretty much unforgivable in my opinion, regardless of the circumstances.
-
1 minute ago, ChinRey said:
Today people would have been shocked. And prehaps they would ahve been more shocked if they right-clicked on an Amati and saw: "Creator: Antonio Stradivarius".
Back in earlier days, people probably wouldn't have noticed at all. Nobody expected the Master to do the dirty work himself. I think the closest modern equivalent to the pre industrial revolution workshops is the restaurant kitchen. If you go to a Jamie Oliver restaurant, you don't expect to get a meal cooked by Oliver himself, do you? That was how everything was done. Even art.
Again, I completely agree, my comment was more just an attempt to illustrate how the problem with the demand for "original mesh" has come about, i.e. the unreasonable expectations and misunderstandings SL consumers have when it comes to the creation of content in SL.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, ChinRey said:
I don't see that as a problem to be honest. It's original content made by a company - by a group of people.
I mean, a Stradivarius violin is a genuine Stradivarius if it was made at Antonio Stradivarius' workshop and under his supervision. The fact that all the actual work was almost certainly done by his empolyees, doesn't matter.
While I agree with you 100% I do have to wonder what the reaction would be if someone who bought a Stradivarius were able to examine it (i.e. the RL equivalent of right-clicking and checking the General Tab in the build window) and see "Creator: Johann Russo" or some other common name they didn't recognize!
-
I don't think the demand for "original mesh" equates to "unique content" since it's most likely that having unique scripts is of far less importance to consumers than unique mesh or (in the case of furniture, etc) unique animations. For the most part the average consumer is probably more concerned with whether the script actually functions properly than if its unique and created solely for use in the creators own products.
I think the saddest part of creators misusing content from illegitimate sources in order to keep up with a busy workload is that, in most cases, if a creator is successful enough to be so in demand that they automatically receive invites to all the large events and have such a heavy workload then chances are they're in a position to hire other aspiring creators to help out, but choose not to for whatever reason.
Personally I've never used AV-Sitter or other similar scripted systems but then I create more for my own amusement and because I enjoy a challenge, so will create the mesh, write all the accompanying scripts, and on the occasions (which are rare since I don't often make furniture) that the item in question requires them I'll also try my hand at creating the animations as well. That being said any creator that's running a popular store on their own and providing 100% unique content must, in my opinion, be some kind of SL savant since the workload involved in just creating the content alone is heavy enough, when you then consider the marketing, social media, customer support, etc that's also necessary to make a business successful in SL these days I just don't see how any one person could find the time to do all those things and still be able to release multiple quality products per month.
-
4
-
-
25 minutes ago, Fionalein said:
Why should I? It's long and you didn't take the time to try to understand my argument either?
And what leads you to believe that I've misunderstood your argument, cos I'm fairly sure I understand what you were saying quite well?!
ETA: @FionaleinOkay, having re-read your post a couple of times I will freely admit that I got the wrong impression. I misconstrued your meaning and assumed that the part I quoted was condoning the use of models acquired from such sites when what you meant was that it's better to purchase mesh created by others and customize it rather than upload "unique" meshes from illegitimate sources.
I'll leave my original ramble as is since the information regarding the TOS constraints of 3rd party model repositories may be of some relevance to the discussion in this thread, but I do hereby sincerely and profusely apologize for the misunderstanding and will now go sit in the corner and think about what I've done... Sorry Fionalein!
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Fionalein said:
Its a public secret most don't - they just hire contracters to do the "original" work - so much for respecting the customer desire
I'm talking about creators of original content sold on 3rd party sites, not SL store owners... perhaps you'd like to read the rest of my post before responding?
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Fionalein said:
even if the "unique thing" is taken from a 3rd party repository which's TOS does not allow reuse in virtual worlds like SL.
This isn't so much about some "craze" over unique mesh, it's about respecting the rights and wishes of the people that spend time creating the original content.
Personally I have absolutely no problem with an SL store owner hiring someone else to create mesh for them or purchasing the rights to upload their creations, but as ChinRey pointed out in the above post there are some online stores that don't allow content sold on their site to be uploaded to SL, or even distributed on other official 3rd party repositories (in the case of those that do the online store will often take a much higher percentage of the profits from each sale than they would if the item were available exclusively on their site alone).
Creators who choose to make content and sell it on those sites often rely on those profits in order to help pay their RL bills, and by allowing those creations to then be uploaded to SL they are in effect breaking the online stores TOS and therefore risk having their accounts disabled and losing the income on which they rely. This can lead to them being put in a situation where they have no choice but to file DMCA takedowns to protect their livelihood. If a creator is selling their content on one of these online stores they have invariably had to agree to a TOS, and, regardless of how cute an item is or how much anyone may want a copy in SL, that doesn't give anyone the right to put someone elses livelihood in jeopardy, regardless of whether the SL store owner pays for a limited license or not.
If a content creator has agreed to an online repositories TOS and an SL store owner really wants a copy of an item that they can upload to SL then they should contact the original creator of that item and negotiate a price for them to create a similar item which won't be covered by any existing TOS and can therefore be uploaded to SL legitimately.
-
1
-
-
While I'm sure to some this will seem like stating the obvious, I think it's worth pointing out for the sake of this discussion that there's a huge difference between a creator being "inspired" by other designs and making something similar (or, in the case of some, copying that design outright) and someone downloading 3D models from a site and attempting to pass those items off as their own original works.
While the former may indicate a lack of imagination (and a certain amount of dishonesty if the creator in question is attempting to pass said items off as their own original creations), the latter is, as Tourdeforce points out, nothing short of theft and clearly against the law if the person doing it hasn't been granted a license to do so (and even in the case of those that have been granted license to use that content within SL, if said license doesn't permit them to grant LL the rights to use it according to the current TOS then it's still against the law).
Furthermore trying to use the excuse that "I'm so busy that I just can't keep up with the workload" is simply unacceptable, the truth is that in SL we always have a choice as to how much work we take on since each creator is essentially self-employed, so the "I just couldn't keep up" excuse basically translates to "I'm greedy and/or incapable of admitting my own limitations".
The sad thing is, nature is literally full of weird and wonderful things which can be drawn upon for inspiration. Some of my favourite RL artists are those that have managed to combine inspiration gained from the world around them with their own imaginations to create stunning and original works.
Am I outraged? I can honestly say I really wish I was, but for the most part SL content creation seems to rely on the honour system, and my faith in humanity has long since waned beyond the point of shock or outrage, these days the most I can muster in cases such as this is a general feeling of disappointment.
-
3
-
-
@Krystle Poikolainen It sounds as though the mesh surface is displaying the entire sprite sheet and not running the texture animation at all. Any chance you could post a copy of the script and maybe a screenshot?
-
5 hours ago, SubZeroWins said:
Missing semicolon was only a typo while posting it.
And yes, Its my land and I run other scripts with no problem.
I will post the modified code Im using for my purposes (there are very few changes though)
integer Countdown=5; integer IsDay; Check() { vector sun_dir = llGetSunDirection(); if (sun_dir.z > 0 && IsDay == FALSE) { IsDay = TRUE; } else if (sun_dir.z < 0 && IsDay == TRUE) { IsDay = FALSE; } Countdown=5; llSetTimerEvent(1.0); } default { on_rez(integer start_param) { llResetScript(); } state_entry() { vector sun_dir = llGetSunDirection(); IsDay = (sun_dir.z < 0); Check(); llSetTimerEvent(1.0); } timer() { Countdown--; if(Countdown==-1) { Countdown=5; Check(); } } }The problem appears when switching from day to night or the opposite. Its exactly the moment when the timer stops.
Im not that experienced with lsl but I cant see the reason its happening.
Btw, thank you all for your contributions.
I don't know if you have anything else going on in your script that you've omitted which would require you to decrement the value of Countdown but if not then using a 1 second timer then only performing an action once every 6th time the event is triggered is hideously inefficient, you may as well just remove Countdown entirely and use a longer duration for the timer instead. Also there's no need for the llSetTimerEvent command in the Check() function since you set a timer in the state_entry event after calling the function and you only need to set the timer event once rather than each time the function is called.
I'd strongly recommend you heed Roligs advice and use a much slower timer, 1 second (or even 6) is far too rapid for detecting a change that only happens once every few hours (you can always use the changed event to detect changes in sun position when moving between different regions, there really is no need to be using a timer that fast if all you're doing is checking to see if the sun is up).
Additionally I can't help wondering if it would be simpler and more efficient to remove
vector sun_dir = llGetSunDirection(); IsDay = (sun_dir.z < 0);from the state_entry event and replace the multiple if statements in the Check() function with
Check() { vector sun_dir = llGetSunDirection(); IsDay = (sun_dir.z > 0); }so the final script would look something like this...
integer IsDay; Check() { vector sun_dir = llGetSunDirection(); IsDay = (sun_dir.z > 0); } default { on_rez(integer start_param) { llResetScript(); } state_entry() { Check(); llSetTimerEvent(120.0); } timer() { Check(); } changed(integer change) { if (change & CHANGED_REGION) { Check(); } } } -
You can offset the spawn point for particles by using the PSYS_SRC_PATTERN_ANGLE_CONE pattern, setting PSYS_SRC_ANGLE_BEGIN and PSYS_SRC_ANGLE_END to 0 (PSYS_SRC_INNERANGLE and PSYS_SRC_OUTERANGLE have been deprecated and replaced with ANGLE_BEGIN and ANGLE_END, so the script in the op is outdated), then just use PSYS_SRC_BURST_RADIUS to set the distance from the center of the prim that you want the particles to be generated at.
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Do you have advanced lighting enabled?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Careful what you wish for, if it weren't for those ambient only custom windlight settings a lot of people would probably still be using facelights!