Aquila Kytori

Instead of using split edges on those lower edges have you tried enabling Normals > Auto Smooth from the Object Data Properties panel (and playing around with the angle until everything looks correct). Then you wouldn't have to be concerned with "it's being caused by the Weld Normals setting in the Collada exporter in Blender/Avastar." I had never realised that there was savings to be made by uploading objects as link sets ! I guess it must have been mentioned before now but "in one ear and out the other" . So I was curious what you meant when you wrote "would cost a lot extra", did a couple of test uploads and ... wow, 32 objects for the the price of 5 ! 1 fishtail costs 11$L : 32 fishtails only 58L$ !! Next months bargain will be chicken wings. 😀

If you would like others to check out the issue it would be best if you could put together an example file of 2 or 3 simple objects and upload it to, for example this Blender file sharing site : https://pasteall.org/blend/

edited out

Ruth2 : https://blog.inf.ed.ac.uk/atate/2018/01/21/ruth2-and-roth2/ Download: https://github.com/RuthAndRoth/Ruth Comparison :

An example of transferring legacy female avatar upper body UV's to a Ruth2 upper body that has had its original UV map deleted : For this model I found the best results when using the Nearest Face Interpolated and Only Neighbour Geometry options : The legacy Ruth UV's as source : The result of transferring Ruth UV's to Ruth 2 : ....... wasn't .....to bad. Looking at it again ......... the shoulders are bad ! also quite a few of the quads on the UV island borders ended up on the wrong islands but if necessary they could be separated and joined back to the correct islands. For comparison the original Ruth2 UV's : So for non matching geometry I would suggest trying the Nearest Face Interpolated and enable Only Neighbour Geometry option instead of the default Nearest Corner and Best Matching Face Normal.

Shouldn't this be the other way around ? First select the mesh with no UV's (destination) and then shift select the mesh with the UV's (source) ............

Interpolation is : I noticed that both Gimp and Blender don't have a "Nearest Neighbour" option but instead use Interpolation "None" or "No Interpolation". Does that mean that to implement Coffee's jira request LL don't even need to write new "Nearest Neighbour" code, only add the option "No Interpolation" under the Select Face in the Texture tab of the SL build floater?

Cat back in the bag

I am not suggesting anyone use this method. I was just curious how Coffee managed to do it in the first place as an illustration for the jira. and thought others would be to. 🙂

I have a rough understanding of what Linear Interpolation is and why it is one of the options in Gimp when scaling images up or down but can you try to explain why Interpolation is used when uploading an image to SL. ? Reading this gave me a clue to sorting a texture problem I ran into this evening

Retrying to upload images ......... Starting from a model with a similar problem to yours : 1: Triangulate the mesh, tris to quads : 2: Use the beautify tool on the mesh. May need to play with the Max angle in the Beautify tool panel (see anim in previous post) : 3: Convert the triangles back to quads , Note change in edge flow ! :

Perhaps the Beautify tool in Blender may help ? Save your work before trying this You will need to first convert the mesh to triangles.......... Starting with a model with similar problems to yours : hmmmf ! When I tried uploading the images I get the error "There was a problem uploading the file." OK doesn't really matter because the animated .gif uploaded and you can see the triangulated model before using the beautify tool. Start again ........... 1: Triangulate your model. 2: With the model selected use the Beautify tool. You may find you need to adjust the angle a little to get the effect. See anim below : 3: Convert the triangles back to quads. Note this will change the edge flow !

My guess is that such a high Physics weight of +9000 is caused by the bug that can appear when you are using triangle based physics that consist of two parallel collision surfaces where one or both are not perfectly flat. An example : This is my visual Arch model : I had intended to force this bug to show itself but by chance when I uploaded my first test physics model the bug was already there: Also I forgot to check the normals of my first physics model so this one had the back wall normals facing the wrong way. The Physics cost was 8837 ! Uploaded again but this time with corrected normals. The Physics cost was now a whopping 29709.037 : Usually this very high physics cost can be corrected by making sure that both the front wall and back wall faces of the physics mesh are perfectly flat, doing this by selecting each surface in turn and scaling to zero along the Y axis, (S Y 0) : Now the Physics weight is a correct 0.500 : Back in 20213 @Drongle McMahon tried to track down the exact cause of these occasionally very high physics weights when using triangle based physics: Episode 1 : Episode 2 : Episode 3 : Episode 4 : Unfortunately the images are missing from Episodes 1, 3 and 4 but still intact in Episode 2 where you can get some idea of how much time and effort he used to put into his investigations. Back to the Arch Physics .......... To me something has changed in the last few of years in the way the Physics weights are calculated for triangle based physics models like this. For something like this arch or a floor with an opening you used to be able to add 1 or 2 "thin" triangles that would join one surface to the other or be used to increase the bounding box dimensions and not have the physics weight increase significantly but now its just not practical. An example below shows how the Physics weight increases dramatically when adding collision surfaces that join the front and back walls at the arch opening. First adding one quad (two triangles) increase the weight from 0.500 to 7.373 ! And adding 2 quads increases from 0.500 to 18.510 ! Another thing Your screenshot is showing a physics weight of 0.360 for the Base Hull. That would be the cost if you left the Physics Shape Type at the default Convex Hull in the Features tab of the Edit floater. The arch would be closed. When the Physics Shape Type is changed to Prim (archway open) then the weight would be equal to the Mesh value of 2.178 as indicated in the little Physics panel of the uploader window.

There are 3 rules that you should follow when making a Physics model: 1: Each visual model should have its own dedicated physics model. 2: The Bounding Box dimensions (X Y and Z) of the physics model should match the BB dimensions of the visual model. 3: Keep it simple. You are complying with rules 1 and 3 but as animats and Rey have already pointed out you are not complying with rule 2. To make a collision mesh "that will offer collision only at the posts on each corner" you will need to create a variant of Reys "add one extra big triangle at the top". The trick is to make the extra big triangle so that it has no surface area, (a collapsed/degenerate triangle). First image indicates where in Blender you can enable the option to show the Bounding Box of an object. The next shows Rey's extra big triangle added to extend the BB to match that of the visual model: To collapse the triangle select the vertex indicated in the .gif below and snap it to one of the other vertices of the triangle. Note that when you select this "triangle" after snapping, there are still 3 vertices and 3 edges ". (don't be tempted to use the merge tool because that will convert the three existing edges of the collapsed triangle into a single edge ! ) : That's the Physics done. After loading up this physics model in Step 1 of the Physics menu of the SL mesh uploader, the uploader will throw an error and indicate with a red line/edge (with a little red vertex at each end) where the error is in the Physics model. (Note: in the Firestorm viewer the error is shown in red but in the SL viewer the error will show as thicker black lines and vertices). The error will disappear after hitting the Analyse button in Step 2. Now the collapsed triangle will be ignored for collision purposes but will still be used to increase the BB dimensions. The collision model consists of only the 4 post hulls : the last image shows the pergola rezzed inworld with the Physics Shape Type change to Prim, ( and show Physics enabled) :

😎

Welcome back. In the title you asked for some feedback so here's mine on your "Room with table and two chairs." First impression was it looked odd. Like a simple stage set for a play. Talking heads. Curtain rises, two people sitting at a table. They talk about an end of life experience for an hour and half then the curtain comes down. Perhaps change the angle of the camera a little and rotate one of the chairs so that its turned more towards the viewer. Such a large room and only two chairs at the table? I at first thought the table and chairs were scaled to small but when I added a cut-out to check it appears to me that the cupboard above the work surface is to large, perhaps reduce its Z dimension a little? One thing is sure, it is mounted way to high up on the wall to be practical. Something I feel would improve the room would be to have the curtains drawn back into the corners of the alcoves. Somehow it looks mean/cheap the way they are hung at the moment. This would also allow for wider windows : Its already looking more interesting with the addition of the fridge and oven so I think more furniture and details is the way to go Perhaps in some future posts add some screenshots of the objects in edit mode. Rendered like this it is not possible to say if they are "optimized" for SL or not. The Cloth simulator is fun but if you want low poly often it is best to model the cloth by hand. 😉

This is done in Blender but it is not something you would normally do on a model. Zeroing out the UV's means selecting all the UV islands and scaling them down to zero so that all the vertices on the UV map are mapped to a single point in the UV space. Normally not a very useful thing to do. So why did I do that and then mention it in my post ? This was about Land Impact right and I said: " For reference: When dimensions set to 1 x 1 x 1m, the mesh set to Smooth Shading, UV's zeroed and using default upload settings the result is : " Size. Shading. UV's Amongst other things those 3 things effect the LI (Download) cost of the model. So that you or anyone else following along could get the same (or very similar) results they would have to have a model the same size using Smooth shading and have the same UV unwrap (mapping). Zeroing out the UV's like that ensures that you or anyone else would be using the same UV layout as in my example. In the following images notice how the Triangle count in the mesh uploader remains the same but the Vertex count changes depending on the UV layout. The first image shows the vertex count when uploading the model which had the UV's Reset then scaled to zero and then positioned at the lower left hand corner of the UV space: The next is the same model which has had had seams added along the hard edges of the 1/4 spheres and along the middle of the central sphere: Model UV unwrapped using the Smart UV Project method : and the same Smart UV project unwrap followed by scaling the UV's to zero: Note: It is OK to have the UV's scaled to zero if you are just going to apply a single color to each material face when you have it rezzed inworld. It is also sometimes used in Low poly texturing. See this video at 2:11, the section on Colorizing low poly objects : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jHUY3qoBu8

I use ScreenToGif. https://www.screentogif.com/

For the antennas do a search for 1/4 wave ground plane antenna and discone antenna. The ones on sale today don't seem to have changed much from the ones shown in your photo. Probably made from thin aluminium tubing like the old tv aerials were.

Check which dragon you are using for animating. The dragon facing along the Y axis is for animation. This is the dragon that was rotated so that it is using Z forwards and Y up. The rotations were applied and then the dragon was rotated again to be facing along the Y axis but this time the rotations were not applied. In the .gif below notice that the dragon is looking along the Y axis : When using this "Y facing" dragon the X_Mirror works fine.

Correction to my earlier post : It should have been Z axis is Forwards and Y axis is Up .

The reason the animation importer was throwing up that error was because the dragon skeleton had two bones that should not have been there. Bone and Bone.001. Deleting those two bones will enable you to import an animation without an error. Uploading an animation which rotates the mShoulderLeft bone of the dragon : Here is a video that explains how to animate the model in the standing up position while still having the base model/armature using Y up and Z forwards. Enable the subtitles/captions for an explanation for how this works.

When uploading the dragon armature as an Animation the SL animation importer throws up the error "Unable to read animation file, Incorrect root joint name, use "hip". A very simple Stick_man model rigged using the same (I hope it is the same) "bento" rig and animated to move the left leg forwards and the right arm back, imports without an error. Note that the armature/model had to be rotated so that Y axis is Forwards and Z axis is Up otherwise the limbs were rotated incorrectly ( and Scale set to 39.3701 meters to inches. I am not sure yet how important this scale setting is. its just something I read in an earlier thread). If I understand correctly something Optimo mentioned in an earlier thread; the .bvh (or was it the SL importer ?) looks for a bone named hip to use as root but if it doesn't find that it will accept mpelvis instead. I checked and the dragon does have the mpelvis bone. (I also tried renaming the mPelvis to hip but same error). Does anyone have any ideas what what could be causing this error ?

Wings are skinned :

YAY! No more Spikes 1: After watching one of Medue's videos I again repositioned and shortened by quite alot many of the head bones. 2: I Isolated the head and removed all vertex groups from this part of the mesh. 3: Isolated teeth and tongue for weighting separately later on. 4: Isolated the lower part or the head which is suppose to move with the mFaceJaw bone. (see first image below) 5: With only the relevant bones selected and in the vertex select, (masking mode) I assigned Automatic Weights from Bones to the the lower part of the head. 6: Repeated step 5 for the upper part of the head, and for the tongue. 7: The Upper and lower teeth were each selected separately and assigned weights of 1.00 to the relevant vertex group. 8: Checked for main bone rotations and smoothed out where necessary by hand painting the weights. Eyes, skin between wing bones and more smoothing to do.......... Notes on weighting, Assigning Automatic Weight from Bones to the lower jaw area, with the rest of the model masked out and only the relevant bones visible : Result is no "leaking of weights to other parts of the head : The result of not Isolating (masking out) the rest of the head and bones is shown below. With MfaceLipLowercenter selected note how the front part of the gums and teeth are also weighted.