Aquila Kytori

Yes ........ but instead of having to upload a separate image texture for each of the student's names it may be more interesting for you to create a texture consisting of all the students names on a single texture ? Then use the Vertical and Horizontal offsets in the SL build floater to select which name appears on each model. In the example below I set out 20 "Student Names" in two vertical columns of 10 names on a 1000px² . 10 names per column makes it very easy to use the vertical offset up/down arrows to select a name from the list. In Blender create a little single sided Label Object and UV unwrap and map it carefully to the first name in the list of names : Next Duplicate this Label Object. This new duplicate Label object will be later joined to the students model: Hide the original Label object. Select the duplicate label object and the students model then use Ctrl + J to join them to be a single object. Next, in edit mode reposition the name label approx. 1mm above the surface of the students model. If necessary resize the label as required. Repeat the above for each of the students models. No need to mess about with the UV's to select the correct name for the label in Blender, that will be done when rezzed inworld. The model should now have 2 (at least) materials assigned to it. One for the model and one for the label. When rezzed inworld edit the model and with the Select face enabled in the SL build floater select the Label face and apply the List of Student Names texture to this face. Set the Alpha Mode to Alpha Masking and Mask Cutoff to something above zero. Now all that is left to do is change the Vertical Offset using the up/down arrows to select the correct name for the label. For names in the second column set the Horizontal Offset to 0.5 :

In Blender > with your Wings Top object selected > Object Data Properties tab > UV Maps, check to see if you have more than one uv map in the list of UV Maps. For SL, an object can only have one UV map (with up to 8 material "layers"). If there are more than one uv map in this list then only the first (or selected) uv map will be exported and used on your model in SL. If the wrong UV map is exported with the object you will find that the uv islands of that object will have been scaled down to a single point on the uv space resulting in what you are seeing, thats to say the material faces of the object will display the colour of a single pixel from the applied texture. So instead of the expected UV mapping : the UV map will have the above 2 UV islands scaled down to a single point and the result will be something like this : The fix is to only have the one correct uv map in the list and delete any others or when exporting to .dae, make sure that you have the correct UV map selected and in the Collada export options panel have the "Only Selected Map" checked. Another earlier thread on this subject can be found here :

My guess is that your teacup, teabag etc are all one object in blender and that if you look in the Data properties tab > UV Maps you will find that you have more than 1 UV map in the list ! For SL a single mesh object can only have 1 UV map (with up to 8 materials assigned to it). If an object does have more than 1 UV map in the list of uv maps then only the selected UV map will be used. any part of the mesh using the other uv maps will be zeroed to a single point at the bottom left-hand corner of the UV space resulting in the effect you getting . see image and gif below. IF this is the case you will need to 1: Separate the object in Blender by UV map (or material ) so that you have the same number of objects as UV maps. 2: Then rename the appropriate UV map for each object so that all the objects will be using a UV map with the same name. 3: Delete the unused UV maps from the list for each object. 4: Delete the unused materials from the list for each material. 5: When done join the objects back to be a single object again. This should result in a single object with a single UV map. When, in edit mode with everything is selected the UV's will look a mess because all the UV islands will be overlapping but when selected by material all will be good In the example below I have 1 object (3 meshes ) 3 UV maps. The Cube UV's uv map is selected in the list of UV Maps : Separating into 3 objects and renaming the appropriate UV map to UV map for all 3 objects. All 3 objects uv map have to be given the exact same name so that when joined to a single object again only this 1 name will appear in the list of UV Maps : The result 1 object and 1 UV map with 3 materials : Selecting by material as one would in SL :

It seems a little odd to me that is necessary to have the Vertical scale value set to 2.9 which would have the effect displacing your texture vertically so that the transparent part of the texture will be mapped to the "text face" and then need to use the Vertical offset 0.4 to correct this by bringing the text (MARI) back into view, but I guess that was a deliberate choice by the creator. Can you check the Vertical scale and Vertical offset values are set the same when you are wearing the necklace.

Yes its the bounding box X Y Z dimensions of the physics model that should match (approximately at least) the bounding box dimensions of the visual model. If the physics BB is not the same as the visual objects BB it will be stretched or squished to size by the SL mesh uploader. If necessary you can view the BB of an object in Blender by selecting the object >Object data tab > Viewport Display > Bounds. Is there a particular reason why you have separated the spiral stairs into 3 separate objects the way you have?

When walking up a narrow spiral staircase in SL it is very easy to "walk up over" the outer rail and fall off. To avoid this increase the height of the rail as much as possible in the Physics mesh. Something like in the gif below, blue is the physics model for the rail object: Also increasing the height of the physics rails will increase the size of the triangles in the physics model which has the benefit of lowering the physics cost ! Link to a thread dealing with a spiral staircase :

If you also have the 3 high lod models named exactly the same (without suffix) then it sounds like you are doing everything correctly. Quick test using my own spiral staircase but using your object names: High Lod objects: Repeat for Physics objects: When Uploading to SL, select the spiralstairs.dae file (containing the 3 high lod objects) then you should find that the spiralstairs_PHYS.dae file has been automatically loaded into the Physics tab for you : Note that in Blender I tried selecting the objects in different orders before exporting and it made no difference. Each time the physics models were aligned correctly to the visual models. If you are still having problems post a screenshot of the full Blender window and maybe we will spot something. or better still share your Blender file A link to an earlier post about uploading linksets of LOD and Physics models

Hi If the texture looks OK in Blender but different when applied to the object in-world then usually it is because the object has more then 1 UV map linked to it in Blender. Check to see if this is the case, Properties panel > Object Data tab > UV Maps. If more then 1 UV map either delete the one that you are not using or before exporting, select the correct UV map then in the Collada export panel use the SL+Open Sim Static presets which should automatically checks the Only Selected UV Map option. If you don't see the Prim option it is because in the SL mesh exporter > Physics panel you did not specify a Physics model to use. You can create your own custom physics model in Blender and choose to use that in the Physics panel > Step1: Pick a physics model (From file option) or simple choose the Cube option from this drop-down menu. This Cube will be stretched X Y and Z to fit your visual models bounding box. The in Step2: Convert to Hulls hit the Analyze button.

That was my question as well Hopefully someone with more experience will be able to asnwer that. My thinking was it would be easier to model the shoe with the foot straight and sole flat to the floor. Then if necessary, you could copy and paste it back in to the original file and rotate the shoe a little to fit the foot etc.

My knowledge of rigging and weight painting is minimal so what I am suggesting below could be completely wrong but I think it will be OK for your shoe creation. To me it sounds like the Pose Position (A pose) has been applied as the Rest Position (T pose) ? Both Pose and Rest Positions are the same. To get back to Rest Pose = T pose and Pose Position = A pose .................... your going to love this lol : thanks to Jaroslav Jerryno Novotny at https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/49768/can-i-set-my-pose-position-like-the-new-rest-position Starting from where it seems you are with at Rest and Pose Position the same : First save your file with a new name because ....... just because Returning to the "default" Rest Position : Looking at your original screenshot and comparing foot position to background grid , to me it looks like the mHipLeft and mHipRight bones have been rotated 5 degrees that's why in the next step we are going to rotate them back by 5°. (and 5° is not just some random number so makes sense). With X axis mirror enabled any rotation we do on the left side will automatically be mirrored on the right side : Remove Armature modifier from body and feet: Applying this pose as Rest Position : Adding back the Armature modifier to body and feet objects: This next step is optional, it is recreating the Pose Position (A Pose) the same as before : Rotating mHipleft (along with mHipRight) minus 5 degrees : Now we have a Rest Position and a separate Pose Position :

Hi again It looks like your model is in an A pose, (legs slightly spread) which results in the soles of the feet not being flat on the floor. In Pose mode the mHipLeft and mHipRight bones have been rotated a little so that there is more space between the thighs which helps when creating and weighting some items of clothes. (for example pants/trousers). When creating your shoes it would be better to have the model in the T pose, the default position of the armature, (no bones rotated in pose mode, the legs are straight, ankles closer together and the thighs usually touching). The soles of the feet will be flat to the ground. If the above is the case then It maybe as simple as switching from the Pose Position to the Rest position in the Properties panel. In Object mode > Select the Armature from the Outliner > Object Data Properties (little green running man icon) > and from the Pose options switch from the Pose Position to the Rest Position. see images below : Note: If needed it is possible to clear the bone rotations made in Pose mode (resetting all bones rotations to the default T pose again) Object mode > Select Armature > Pose mode > A key to select all bones > Alt R to clear all rotations. Now back in Object mode the Pose Position will be the same as the Rest Position.

If edges are showing in object mode but not in edit mode perhaps in edit mode, you have accidentally hidden (H key) a part of the mesh ? In edit mode does Alt + H to unhide change anything? Best is, if you can share that part of your model so that we can have a better look

I'm not expecting you to do this but just letting you know that if necessary you can walk around your build in Blender. In Object mode > View > Navigation > Walk Navigation (Right mouse click this option and Add to Quick Favourites). Adding to Quick favourites makes it easier to switch to this walk about navigation mode. Now when ever you want to go walk about, in Object mode hit the Q key to open your Quick favourites menu and choose this Walk Navigation mode. In this mode cross hairs will replace the mouse cursor. Position the cross hairs at the place you want to start your walk and hit the space bar. Use the arrow keys and mouse to move around the build. Left or Right click to return to the normal navigation again. Some Walk options can be set in Preferences. Oh and make sure the ground plane is very big because if for whatever reason you fall off its a very very long way down..........

Hi Have you tried using the Transfer Mesh Data tool instead of the Data Transfer modifer? See this earlier post here : Note: If you are selecting the objects in the 3D veiwport its first select the object you want to transfer the UV's to and then Shift select the object with the UV's. But if you are selecting the objects in the Outliner its the other way around ! First select the destination object then Shift select the source object. Note that for (me) some reason in Blender v 4.01 and 4.02 after selecting the Transfer Mesh Data option the panel for the transfer options (last operator panel) does not show up in the 3D veiwport as it is supose to. So if you are using one of these versions you will have to hit F9 key (or Edit > Adjust Last Operation...) to get this panel to pop-up. The result is far from perfect but perhaps somewhere to start from:

My guess is as long as the label of the tin is using as much of the UV space as possible then there is not alot that you can do about it. (Maybe you could try sharpening the image texturea little before uploading but unfortunately I don't think it is going to make alot of difference). For comparrison here is a similar tin : Only suggestion I will give is, if like mine the top and bottom of the tin is only using a blank colour then you could get away with using a smaller image texure, 1024 x 512 and still have the same pixel resolution.

Probably because Solidworks is cutting with the equivelant to Blenders Bollean tool/modifier.

Yes, using the Loop Tools addon that comes with Blender. Edit > Preferences > Add-ons > Search for Loop Tools and then enable the add-on: To space the vertices evenly aoround the circle: in Edit mode, first select the circle next RMB (right mouse button) in the viewport to open the context menu. From this menu choose Loop Tools then Circle. This will arrange the vertices to form a circle and all the vertices will be evenly spaced. Note: you can also find the Loops Tools options in the N right hand side panel :

I never use the decimate tool. I just enjoy the process of creating mesh so don't usually mind doing stuff the long way round.

A rough and ready way to reduce vertex count using the Decimate tool. (or Modifier) :

As a general rule, when bringing in a mesh from another programme start buy converting the triangulated mesh to quad mesh. This will make the mesh simpler to edit (and make it possible to select vertex, edge or face loops/rings). To slide an individual vertex along an edge and have it automatically merge to another vertex, first enable Auto Merge Vertices, then select the vertex, hit the G key twice (this enables the vertex slide mode) and move the mouse towards the vertex you wish it to merge to. The first vertex will now be merged to the second. An alternative to slide and auto merge is to First select the vertex you want to merge and Shift select the vertex you want to merge to, then hit the M key (Merge menu) and chooose the At Last option. Edited to add: Just reread your question, the answer to : is G G With the vertex selected press the G key twice and move the mouse in the direction you wish to slide it.

If you mean how is Bryson Jackson selecting the original ring of edges at 1:16 in the video............ You have to be in edge select mode. (see screenshot below). Note tha Bryson is using and older version of Blender so when he says use Right mouse button to select the edge you will use the Left mouse button

Probably the Physics cost is causing the high Li value. When you were walking above the surface of the terrain the mesh object was using default the Physics Shape Type: Convex Hull. This Convex Hull is a very simple collision shape that wraps around your terrain as if it were a wrapped in cling film. Being simple (and inaccurate) it has a low LI cost. When you changed it to use the Prim Type Physics Shape it switched to use the more complex ( and more accurate) physics model you assigned it at the time of uploading to SL. I am assuming here that you correctly didn't Anlyaze the physics when uploading so are using triangle type Physics.The collision surface is now made up of a lot or triangles instead of a simple single hull. The uploader doesn't like to find small or thin triangles in the Physics model. When it does it increases the physics cost. Small triangles means more work for the physics engine. So you are charged more for that. To reduce the Physics cost you need to increase the average size of these triangles that make up the physics model. This is the same as saying simplify the physics model, use less triangles, and try to avoid small triangles. Also, something to keep in mind, when rezzed, you should find that if you scale up your terrain the LI, (physics cost) will decrease ! (because the average size of the triangles that make up the physics model is increasing. Here is a link to an earlier post that you may find useful . It shows where to find the Physics cost in the uploader so that you won't have to keep rezzing the terrain to check the costs (Download and Physics costs ) each time you do a test. If the Physics is not the cause of the high LI then you will have to add some more info, with pics of your visual model and physics model in edit mode and screenshots of the uploader, LOD and Physics windows .

Hurrah for arton ! 👏👏👏

My search didn't come up with a lot of options. The simplest I found was something like the gif below, using a custom group from Markus von Broadys answer on the Blender Stack exchange. https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/222387/changing-colours-precisely-procedurally I think it would be simpler and get a better result using Gimp or PS.

You're flying now You should try uploading the individual seamless image textures to SL, apply them to the appropriate faces, adjust the horizontal and vertical scale and compare the quality of the textures with this building that uses the baked single image texture.