Jump to content

Aquila Kytori

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Aquila Kytori

  1. I am guessing the reason you have so many horizontal edge loops in your model is because you are using Blenders cloth simulator to create the folds? Just thought we should mention another way to create curtains without all the horizontal edge loops. Starting from the ground up : 1: Create a row of half circles laid out approximating the lower edge of the curtain. 2: Join the half circles together creating a continuos wavy edge (using the merge tools). Edit this edge to better simulate the folds along the bottom edge.
  2. Check again with the Bounding Box option enabled. With the object selected : Object Properties > Viewport Display > Bounds (Box) . If the Bounding Box is bigger than you expected it to be then you should check more thoroughly for extra geometry. If still having problems a few screenshots may help If you can, sharing your .blend file is the surest way of sorting the problem. Blender file sharing : https://pasteall.org/blend/
  3. Could that be Blenders way of suggesting that it is time that you move up to 2.8 or even 2.9 !!!! ? lol
  4. Well thats sorted then Just to note that when I tried uploading an object with negative scaling the Uploader gave the error "Missing required level of detail" and "Dae parsing error - see log for details" Annoyingly, the Uploader now has a Log tab but it was empty ! So had to rummage around my harddrive to find the log: 2021-01-01T11:01:55Z INFO # llprimitive/lldaeloader.cpp(2035) LLDAELoader::processElement : Negative scale detected, unsupported transform. domInstance_geometry: Cube 2021-01-01T11:01:55Z INFO # llprimitive/lldael
  5. Hi Alma I don't have the time to check out your tower this evening but if no-one else has answered before then I will look into it first thing tomorrow.
  6. Just me thinking aloud ............. ................... The model has 4 materials assigned to it in Blender but when rezzed, the object still has 4 materials but the assignment to geometry has changed? The assignment of the materials to the rezzed model does show some intelligence (not random). Cups one material, the Plates one material, the Teapot one material, ...........that would leave the Top book, Bottom book and Pages all sharing the same material ? (pages do look like they are using your Page baked material but not the correct tint, same tint as the Teapot ?) The SL m
  7. Hi Can you share your file (or a .blend file containing just the relevant parts) so that we can check it out and do a test upload ? Here is a link to a Blender file sharing site : https://pasteall.org/blend/
  8. Unfortunately, as far as I know This is a 2 step process. First Bake out the shadows on the ground plane. (Note: the image to bake to can be quite small, for a shoebox a 128 x 128 or 256 x 256 would probabaly be plenty big enough). Next use the Compositor to Convert the white to Alpha. (This could also be done using Gimp or Photoshop instead). Open the Compositor. Enable Use Nodes. Delete the default nodes and then add an Image node, an Invert node and a Viewer node. Connect the 3 nodes as shown in the screenshot below. From the Image node
  9. The UV 's were deliberately laid out and saved this way. In Blender we can assign any X Y dimension (pixel size) to the base UV space. But usually it would be 1024 x 1024 for most things and especially for a car Uv's to have the maximum texture space to work with. best texture resolution. For this particular test dragster shell model, when unwrapped and scaled up evenly in X and Y so that it took up maximim UV space without going outside the UV space and without distortion, the UV's took up just over half of the available area. Then the UV's were moved down to the lower part of the
  10. You may have missed the clue that can be found if you dig back in the OP's post history ( crossing my fingers I have this right ................. ) .
  11. For the the test Jaq was supplied with a UV map with a ratio of 1:1 (1024 x 1024px). So somewhere along the workflow, Uploading to Dropbox, downloading from Dropbox, loading it into illustrator, creating the new texture, exporting from Illustrator, importing into SL and finally applying it to the test model, the textures is having its ratio changed from 1:1 to 2:1 (1024 x 1204 to 1024 x 512). and my guess is on Illustrator as the "culprit" (taking as a given that, as Rey has already pointed out, textures are rounded (down) to a power of two when importing into SL
  12. I have just did a test with a cropped image, 630 x 1024px size when exported from gimp and reduced again to 1024 x 512 as expected when Uploaded to SL. and when this is applied to the model it looks remarkably similar to yours: Somewhere along the line the texture is being resized. probably when exporting from Illustrator . @Quarrel Kukulcan Yes I think we are in agreement the texture is being resized somwhere.
  13. I have just repeated your test using Gimp: and as expected the blue test marks are perfectly mapped to the model. Can you confirm that the Image exported from Illustrator is exactly 1024 x 1024 pixels ? And also that when you double click on the texture in your inventory to open it that it indicates the same 1024 x 1024 and that the scale ratio is 1:1 as in the image below : Note that there is also a little red spot on the very front, left in your first screenshot and the red mark on the side panel seems a little blured top edge.
  14. @QueenKellee Kuu If you don't want perfect sculpties then the following may be of interest to you. Using Blender Cycles 2.91, (I guess it would work with any earlier versions of Blender which has Cycles), create a new material using these three nodes: Texture Coordinate, Gamma and Material Output. Connect as in the Image below: Without the Gamma node the resulting "sculpty" was very deformed, (see image below). With the Gamma node, set to a value of 2.1 the cylinder and sphere "sculpties" had noticable flattened surfaces but I am guessing for your purposes this
  15. Hi Export as a .FBX file. Import into Blender. ( https://www.blender.org/download/ ) Export as a Collada .dae. If you are wanting to walk around on the surface of the floor then you are going to need to have a physics model. For such a simple object like in the image below ............... ........... you can use the same object for collision surfaces. After loading up your Floor.dae file open the Physics tab of the SL mesh uploader and in Step 1 choose the High (LoD) option. Next hit the Calculate weights and fee button, (bottom left) and
  16. The furmula √(x2+y2) is used to find the diameter (length of the diagonal through the center, corner to corner,) of a rectanglar box shape, (our Bounding Box), and √(x2+y2) /2. gives the radius. So instead of simply dividing by two (= radius) they use the *n* ( a scale bias* ) instead. Which is the almost the radius but not, AND this n "constant" value can change between 0.48 and 0.6 ! depending on ....... To a non techie person this seems just silly. Writing this down here will hopefully help me remember it better so thanks again for filling in some of the det
  17. @ChinRey Thankyou I had vague memories of Drongle mentioning that it was the radius of the bounding box that was relevent for the size part of the Download calculation so now after spending over an hour searching through very old threads found the one I was looking for. (Before that I was searching Google to find out what your √(x2+y2+z2) was generally used for. Maths is not my thing ). Anyways, now I think I was correct in saying (guessing) that it was the radius, distance from the center of the BB to one of its corners and that you forgot to add the divide by 2 at the end of √(x2+
  18. As a general rule, before making any lower LoD models, load up your High LoD model into the SL mesh uploader then play around with the variables of each LoD to find out what triangle count you need to be aiming for for each of the LoD models . For example, your door, lest say you have in mind a LI (Download cost) of 1. A single door is a small object so the Medium LoD probably has little effect on Download cost so you can set that to "Use LoD above". Then play around with the Low and Lowest triangle counts to find out what numbers you need (tri count) to get a download cost of aroun
  19. This crazy high Physics cost happens sometimes . The fix that usually works is to make sure the coplaner surfaces are perfectly flat. In the Physics model, select the faces of the top surface 'floor) and scale them to zero along the Z axis. S Z 0 validate. Then repeat for the faces on the underside (cieling).
  20. I didn't find any noticeable difference between the two roofs in Download or Physics costs in the Uploader or when rezzed. I should mention that I brought all the models into a single Blender file and this resulted in multiple versions of the materials, different materials for each model. So rather than sort all those out I simply deleted them all so they would be accepted by the Uploader but I don't think this will have made much difference to the Downlod costs. If need be you can have much more accurate physics for these roofs and still have a Physics cost of 0.5 when set to Prim.
  21. Remaining Convex Hull if less than 0.5m? No this not a problem for Cube physics. @grezz360 For the Floors I believe the issue is with the little vertical triangle that you are using to keep the BB Z dimension of the physics model equal to the BB of the visual model. (the triangle by the stairway opening) I have had problems using a vertical triangle this way not so long ago and the answer was to use a much bigger triangle! But if we use the extra vertice method as mentioned in my previous post then this is not necessary. I haven't looked at the roof m
  22. Without having access to your .blend file it is differcult to say what may be poing on. So if you are still having problems you could, copy and paste the floor models (along with their Physics models) into a new .blend file and upload it somwhere so we can check the model and do some test uploads. A Blender file sharing site : https://pasteall.org/blend/ A couple of things that don't look quite right in your screen shots : First, in the preview window, your collision surface is in the middle of the visual model instead of being aligned to the top surface of the floor. Second
  23. I watched the 2.80 hammer tutorial (very good) and only noticed a couple of differences to 2.901. Look Dev mode is now called Material Preview and the Point light now uses Power in Watts. In the Use Nodes panel leave the Strength at 1 and vary the Power with the Watts value. The painting tutorial was using 2.75 ! so completely different now. look for 2.8 paint tutorials. Then you will need a baking tutorial Playing around with SL Shininess gives results like this: You can find noise textures with google (good for car paints )
  24. Still works @IvyTechEngineer The image texture is on the object when rezzed and the actual texture is saved at My Inventory > Textures. It is not clear to me what you are trying to do. 1: Create a 2D image texture of the top surface of your MEMS sensor so that it can be slapped onto the top face of a flattened prim cube. or 2: Upload a 3D mesh model which uses two materials to illustrate how the electrical circuit is etched onto the top surface of the lower Substrate. see screenshot below: or ................ ?
  25. 1 answer is you need a phys /collision surface to sit on. In the example below I have uploaded a simple cube which is using a pyramid shape for physics. In the fist screen shot I can only click and sit at the very center of the cube. If I click on any other part of the top face of the cube I get the error "There is no suitable surface to sit on, try another spot." In the next screen shot, the cube rotated 90° it is only possible to click and sit on this one edge : And in the last screenshot, cube rotated another 90°, the base of physics pyramid at
  • Create New...