Aquila Kytori
-
Posts
1,217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Aquila Kytori
-
-
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 :
17 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:This was really my question. How do you move vertices along a circular edge so they align with the sphere contour?
is G G
With the vertex selected press the G key twice and move the mouse in the direction you wish to slide it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, IvyTechEngineer said:
The next question goes back to an earlier version of the mode and reducing the mesh. I can
1.) merge vertices
2.) I can use the approach discussed in Bryson Jack's video using the Checker Deselect in Blender
However, I am unsure how to align a vertices so it would follow the contour of a sphere. If I could figure that out I think it would help.
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
-
1 hour ago, Monica Greenfield said:
managed to get it to upload and everything, at first I was walking above it some distance, so it didnt look right. Eventually I tried the options out to get it to be walkable on the actual surface topology of the shape, and applied a texture.
But it ended up having a massive land impact of 50!
I can post pics if that would help, but is there a rookie mistake I made somewhere? I was hoping to keep the LI very very low, so I can resize it and align it at different angles to create an immersive skybox with walkable, varied terrain.
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 .
-
3
-
-
44 minutes ago, arton Rotaru said:
That's the case and I'm guilty for it being a thing now. 😇
Hurrah for arton ! 👏👏👏
-
1
-
-
On 12/14/2023 at 10:32 PM, IvyTechEngineer said:
The image I had before had a stronger green undertone, 24A43B, which I assume I could add to the outside wall somehow ... need to research this a little more ...
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.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:
What it looks like in Second Life
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.
-
2 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:
ok, I attempted to create a single texture map for the UV map of the house and I got this. I think it is ok. Not sure why some of the images bleed over to the other islands...
In the Bake panel > Margin > change the Type from Adjacent Faces to Extend.
-
13 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:
I got the impression that maybe I could bake the images together to create a single image texture?
You are the an engineer, do the maths !
I will use an Addon ...............
Sometimes is OK to bake all the materials to a single Image texture but in this case it isn't.
When we have the UV's scaled up so that the image textures are correctly scaled on the model we are increasing the number of repeats of the seamless textures across the surfaces. This increases the number of pixels per meter ( Texels/meter), increases the density of pixels on the model.
If we now bake down the materials to a single 1024 x 1024 image texture this will drastically reduce the pixel density across the model and resulting in a loss of detail.
Example : the front end of the building is 4m x 4m, If we scale up the all the UV's so that the front of the building's UV island exactly fits the 1024² image texture (UV space) we have an pixel density of : 1024 / 4m = 256 pixels per meter. Nice
Now we scale down all the UV islands so that they all fit within the UV space ...........the pixels density will, in this particular example, now only be approx 64 px/m
The single baked image texture compared to the original seamless textures is not good................unusable ............
Baking down multiple materials to a single image is fine for small objects but not for larger ones like this building.
14 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:I think I need to realign the UVMap to make sure all the islands of the outside wall have the same vertical reference because of the image texture I am using.
Hint....... If instead of having a vertical UV seam at each corner of the outside walls (resulting in 4 UV islands that would later need aligning) you only have 1........... one corner with a vertical seam would result in 1 longer UV island.
Texel Density Checker addon for Blender : https://mrven.gumroad.com/l/CEIOR
-
4 hours ago, Spruce Evergreen said:
I ran into a few issues also with land impact being higher than I want but may just be trial and error.
If you find that the Physics cost when Physics Shape type is set to Prim is higher than the Download cost then I would suggest you try the Planes method
A quick guide for the cost of the box method is, every box you used to create your physics model will have a physics cost of 0.36.
Compare the different Physics costs of the two methods in the "Can't rezz on mesh" thread I linked to in my previous post. (Box : 8 x 036 = 2.88 Planes : = 0.583 ).
-
If you uploaded any custom lower LoD models then they can be saved as well :
-
1
-
-
Yay Chic has already done the heavy lifting I'll only add a couple of screenshots.
As Chic says lets keep this one simple. We are assuming that all you want to do at this stage is, when rezzed inworld apply seamless textures to the appropriate faces of the house.
All that you need to do is, in Blender, select faces of the model and assign them a material and you are ready go.
In the example below I have laid out the UV's approximately the same as you have yours.
The first material we assign to the model will automatically be applied (assigned) to all the faces of the model.
Below I have added a new material and named it Wall_Outside. In the Shader editor I added a new Image texture and loaded up my seamless tileable Wall_Outside image texture.
The scaling is probably not correct at the moment but this is easily fixed by either scaling up the UVs in Blender before exporting and or selecting by material face inworld and adjusting the Vertical and Horizontal scaling in the Texture tab of the build floater.
Next we add a couple more materials and select faces and Assign them.
We can scale up the UV islands in blender :
or leave as is and scale up inworld.
Thats it ! Don't be afraid to experiment. You don't even need to load up the seamless image textures to the Shader editor in Blender. Just add the number of materials you need and assign them to the appropriate faces. Select your model > export it and bring it into SL as is then apply your seamless textures there.
Once you have that done then go back to Blender and try loading up image textures for each material.
17 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:I assume this would be the textures that are already available in Second Life? Otherwise, I could try to buy or dins something.
You can buy seamless textures inworld, from the SL market place, create your own or search the internet for CC0 seamless textures.
For example this one : https://cc0-textures.com/c/wood
There are different ways to layout the UV's depending on how we intend to use them. As Chic has hinted if we were going to bake out textures in Blender then they would be layed out quite differently. but yours are just fine for the moment.
17 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:I can have up to 8 materials for a model. Only one image can be applied to a UVmap?
Yes up to 8 materials assigned to a mesh for SL and each of those materials can be assigned its own image texture if needed. In the example above 3 materials for 3 seamless image textures.
The UV's could also be stacked by material one above the other. or in the example below 4 materials on 3 different UV layers:
-
22 hours ago, pastramicerami said:
so i made my own hair mesh for my avatar and im trying to upload it, i cannot see the preview at all. is there something wrong with the file?
Hi,
Sounds like something is not quite right.
We will need a little more information to find out what exactly.
Can you post a screenshot of the complete Blender window with your model in edit mode ( including Outliner and Modifer panels if any ).
After exporting to Collada what size is your .dae file?
A screenshot of the SL mesh uploader would probably be useful as well.
In the SL mesh uploader does it indicate any errors like "Missing required level of detail"? If so can you open the Log tab of the uploader and post a screenshot of that .
-
I expect Chic is still in the land of nod ...... zzzzzzzzzzzzz
13 hours ago, Spruce Evergreen said:1. I cannot change my physics mesh shape to "prim" as directed.
if you don't have the Prim option it means that when uploading your visual model you didn't have anything loaded up in the Physics slot of the uploader.
A quick run through of the workflow hoping you will see which part you are perhaps missing :
We have our 2 models, (separate objects in Blender), our Visual model and our Physics model.
In Blenders Outliner panel we name our visual model Building and our physics model Building_PHYS .
When ready to export from Blender we select the visual model > File > Export > Collada .dae and in the Collada export panel we choose the sl + open sim static preset, give it a name and hit the Export Collada button.
Repeat for the physics model, give it the same name and add the suffix _PHYS. In our example we now have the two files Build.dae and Build_PHYS.dae
This _PHYS suffix will be used by the SL mesh uploader to automatically place the physics model in the physics slot of the uploader.
In SL, when uploading select the visual models.dae file (in our case the Build.dae file) :
and if we now open the Physics tab of the mesh uploader we will find that the Build_PHYS file has been automatically loaded into the physics slot for us.
(If for some reason in Step1: Pick a physics model the slot is empty, then open the Choose one... drop-down and select From file > Browse... and select the physics .dae file manually.)
Because we are using "cube " physics model we hit we hit that Analyze button and we should then see the number of Hulls that the uploader created for collision surfaces. If this number seems correct (approx. the same number of hulls as we had boxes in Blender ) we can Calculate Weights and Fees and complete the upload.
When rezzed change the the Physics Shape Type to Prim.
13 hours ago, Spruce Evergreen said:2. my physics layer uploads slightly off and not lined up with my mesh. Example below:
There are 3 rules that you should comply with when creating a physics model:
- Each Visual model has its own physics model.
- The Bounding Box X Y Z dimensions of the physics model must match the BB dimensions of the visual model.
- Keep it simple.
If the physics model is not aligned to the visual model then check that you are complying to rules 1 and 2.
If your visual model is single object in blender then the physics model must also be a single object. If your visual model comprises of two separate objects then each of those objects will have their own physics model.
If the Bounding Box dimensions of the Physics model are not the same as the BB dimensions of the visual model then the physics model will be stretched or squished to fit the BB of the visual model, causing it to be misaligned.
A little more on physics, Planes and Box type , For buildings, Planes type usually has a lower Physics cost............ just saying
If later on you are needing to upload linksets of objects then check out this earlier post
-
1
-
1
-
As already mentioned, the minimum Bounding Box dimensions of a mesh object is 10 x 10 x 10mm. Some of the usual work-arounds are :
- Before exporting, simply increase the Bounding Box dimensions by rotating the object, see post in this earlier thread :
- Use a collapsed triangle to increase BB size, see Wulfie's post in the same thread :
https://community.secondlife.com/forums/topic/492125-how-to-make-thin-mesh/#comment-2520237
- Use a single vertex to increase BB dimension :
https://community.secondlife.com/forums/topic/443860-how-to-level-small-objects/#comment-1985929
- Before exporting, increase the size of the BB by joining the very thin object to a second object.
-
2
-
1
-
@DulceDiva I think I have the gem deformation sorted
In the above example, after applying the Geometry Node modifier the vertex weight groups were transferred from the avatar to the mesh with the gems. This resulted in the gems deforming when bones were rotated because each vertex of a gem had slightly different weights than the underlying vertex of the base mesh.
We corrected one gem by copying the vertex weights of the underlying vertex to all the vertices of the gem.
We can use this fix to correct all the gems if, instead of transferring the weights from the avatar mesh, we transfer the weights from a rigged copy of the base mesh before adding the geo nodes.
The rigged base mesh:
In Object mode make a copy of this mesh (Shft D) and use this copy to add the gems with the geometry nodes :
Apply the Geometry node modifier.
To transfer the weights:
- Object mode. In the Outliner select first the object with the gems, then shift select the rigged object without gems. (The rigged object should be highlighted in dark orange and the object with gems highlighted in a lighter orange colour).
- Weight paint mode. From the Weights drop-down menu choose the Transfer Weights option.
- In the Transfer Weights Data pop-up, Vertex Mapping should be set to Nearest Vertex and Source Layers Selection set to By Name.
and we are done
-
1
-
16 hours ago, DulceDiva said:
In regards to aligning an instance of a gem to each vertex of the mesh underneath, how did you achieve that via nodes? That was exactly what I was wanting to do but didn't succeed!
See screen shot below:
Then with an added "vertex group" input. This uses a vertex group to limit which vertices have instances on them.
See this video for how to control which vertices have the instances using a vertex group :
-
1
-
-
On 11/22/2023 at 6:23 PM, DulceDiva said:
Got it to display at the right size, but now I'm only left with 1 instance,it won't multiply. I'm going insane lol.
The Distance Min value is in meters, so when, as in your screenshot it is set to 2.000 it means the minimum distance between instances is 2 meters !
With a minimum distance between instances set to 2 meters your clothing item is just too small to have more than one instance
-
1
-
-
I was curious about your other post using geometry nodes to scatter instances of objects over the surface of a mesh so had to try it and then see if the distortions could be fixed.
I don't have much experience with skinning and weight painting but my guess is the problem with the deforming gems is because the vertices that make up each gem have different vertex weights assigned to them. If each of those vertices were assigned the same vertex weights as the weights assigned to the nearest vertex on the item of clothing (base mesh) then perhaps you would see less distortion.
In the example below, I didn't use random scattering but instead aligned an instance of a gem to each vertex of the underlying mesh (just a band to go around the waist of an avatar).
Then transferred the weights from an avatar to the band with the gems. In this example I was only concerned with one of the gems, the red gem in the images below:
Take look at the vertex weights of the vertex from the base mesh beneath the red gem and compare them to the weights of the vertices that make up the gem.
In the gif below the first vertex selected is from the base mesh immediately below the gem then the red gems vertices are selected one by one:
Next we copy the vertex weights from this vertex below the red gem and paste them to all the vertices that make up the red gem.
To do this, in edit mode we first select all the vertices of the red gem and then Shift select the vertex below the gem (this makes the vertex from the underlying mesh the the active vertex (last selected and highlighted in white). Then go to the N panel > Item > Vertex Weights and hit the Copy button. This will copy from the acitve vertex to the selected vertices (the gem vertices).
see gif below:
Now all the vertices of the red gem have the same vertex weights (and groups) as its closest base mesh vertex.
When the mTorso bone is rotated the red gem does not deform:
Note that the red gem does appear to be a little smaller now, no idea why that is
For your random scattering of gems I guess you would have to select the closest vertex to the distorted gem each time.
With so many gems to "fix" this method may not be of any use but I learnt a little more about geometry nodes and vertex weights and it kept me occupied for a couple of hours
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Rya Nitely said:
And Chic , the uploader will choose a physics model for you if you don't choose one. I believe it's the low model. So it won't upload without some physics model.
I don't think that is quite correct, so I did a test upload of a very simple one room model:
and in the uploader I left the "Pick a Physics model" option blank. The uploader didn't add a physics model so that when rezzed, there was no Prim option in the Physics Shape Type drop-down.
9 hours ago, Rya Nitely said:I just tested again now and yes I can rez on surfaces without choosing 'solid' and using the default settings 'surface'. I also didn't analyse in this example.
The images shows my upload settings, and the item after uploading it and throwing a fern on it.
Furthermore, my imported model has a physics shape without choosing 'analyse'. It is set to prim and has hills and valleys like the physics shape shows.
If you don't use the Analyze button then anything Step2: will have no effect on the Non Analyzed model. The Surface or Solid options only apply when we are going to Analyze the Physics model.
If we create a Triangle/Planes type physics model designed not to be analyzed in the Uploader:
and assign it in Step1: of the Physics tab of the uploader, we want the Uploader to do nothing to our physics model so that the collision surfaces will be exactly as we designed them to be in Blender, we there fore do not ask the uploader to analyze it.
If on the other hand we want the uploader to analyze our physics model, that's to say convert whatever we assign as a physics mesh into a collection of hulls, then we should create our physics mesh differently. Instead of quads and triangles we build our physics model using non overlapping hulls, usually box shapes:
In the Uploader with this new Physics model assigned we hit the Analyze button, the uploader has very little work to do because the physics model is already a collection of hulls so the result should be very similar to the original physics mesh we gave it. In this example 8 hulls in Blender and 8 hulls after the Analyzing process.
Now we change the Method in Step 2: to Solid and again ask the uploader to Analyze our physics mesh, in this example something is not quite right. The physics now consists of a collection of 10 hulls which may increase our final LI cost. When Solid method is used each hull will be 0.36 in Physics cost, 8 x 0.36 = 2.88 versus 10 x 0.36 = 3.6 . ( When Surface method is used the uploader sometimes creates a lot more hulls than was expected but in these cases the 0.36 multiplier cost per hull is not used. Perhaps @ChinRey could explain why this is ? )
We can sometimes fix this by setting the Simplify method in Step 3: to Retain% and adjusting the Retain % value followed by hitting the Simplify button :
And BTW, I didn't have any problems rezzing on the floor of the room which used the Analyzed physics version and had its Convert to Hulls method set to Surface
I guess because it was such a simple object.
-
1
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:
I am working on my dog house design now. Not sure the best way to do that. Also, maybe I could add some loop cuts around the edges and paint them black to make the outline look better?
If Chic's mantra is "testing, testing, testing," mine would be "reference images, ref. images, ref. images".
Check out some dog house images with google.
For example simply adding some trim will better define the edges :
-
1
-
-
On 10/23/2023 at 8:42 PM, IvyTechEngineer said:
In the past I have never had any luck with applying multiple textures to an object I have built and uploaded.
On 10/22/2023 at 7:28 PM, IvyTechEngineer said:
From your Blender screenshot you appear to have successfully added 5 material slots and applied them to relevant faces of your model so it is not clear to me what part of this process you are having problems with ?
On 10/23/2023 at 8:42 PM, IvyTechEngineer said:Also, when the object is downloaded the textures are not downloaded as well, I think.
Don't worry about this. Very very few people upload there image textures along with the model. There is almost no advantage in trying to do this. Just do like every body else and upload your textures as separate uploads and then apply them to your model inworld using the SL edit floater.
-
I'm not happy with my previous post, it makes it appear as if there is only one way to unwrap and edit the UVs etc of your model when really there are others that are perhaps less complicated like for example in orthographic view, selecting individual walls and UV unwrapping using the Project from View ( Bounds) method ............
Since you're already familiar with UV unwrapping, you just need to keep in mind that you'll be applying a seamless tileable texture to each material surface and edit the UVs accordingly.
If necessary, additional texture re-scaling and offsetting can be performed in SL using the edit build floater.
Put on your engineers white (or is it red for engineers?) safety helmet and do what engineers do best, solving problems
-
16 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:
I attempted to create 5 materials for the building floor. Most of the videos I watch don't show you how to merge all the images into a single image for upload for a single mesh model to Second Life.
You don't merge all the images into a single image !
1 Seamless tilable image texture for each material.
In Blender you unwrap all 5 materials to a single UV map. Think of each material UV's as a layer in the UV space. So each material will be unwrapped to its own "layer" . If, in Edit mode you now select all of the model, the UV's will look a mess because all the material UV's will be stacked on top of each other. This is not a problem because whether in Blender or in SL, when you select by material to assign an image texture to the faces only the UV's of this material will be selected.
16 hours ago, IvyTechEngineer said:Maybe I need to create a new image that has all the textures I want and adjust the uv map (this is what I did using Paint).
No. A model this size will be using seamless tileable image textures on its surfaces. These Image textures do not need to be applied in Blender. In Blender all you need to do is assign a test grid to each material so that you can check the orientation of the Uv's in the UV space. At the same time we are checking that the scaling of the Uv islands of a single material are all approximately at the same scale, And checking that the scale the UV's of all the materials are also at a similar scale to one another, though this is less important because the individual image texture can be rescaled when applied in SL.
In Blender we test with a UV grid then in SL we apply a seamless tileable texture to each set of material faces. If you have these image textures on your hard-rive (downloaded from the internet or created yourself in Paint) then of course you can test them out in Blender as well. Any seamless textures you have will be uploaded separately from the mesh. Or you buy some seamless tileable textures from the many texture suppliers stores inworld or from the SL MP.
So all you need to do in Blender is mark seams, UV unwrap and edit the UV's so they are orientated correctly.
Best is, after marking seams and assigning the 5 materials , in edit mode select all of the model and UV unwrap everything in one go. This will result in all the UV islands having approx. the same scale. Then edit these islands to suit. If some of the UV's are a little deformed (edges that should be aligned to X or Y are off) then try unwrapping again either using the Conformal or Angle Base method :
There are different ways you could unwrap this particular model, below is an example of unwrapping using UV seams and aiming to have, where possible, a single UV island for each material.
For example the exterior walls:
If we mark a single vertical UV seam somewhere on the exterior walls this should unwrap nicely as a single continuos UV island, The seamless texture will wrap around the exterior walls with only a single join where the UV seam was placed.
The same for all the other walls and floors. If UV seams are placed correctly each material UV will be a single UV island. Note in the example below the interior walls unwrap as 2 UV islands, main interior walls and interior walls of the elevator space.
As you can hopefully see its all about marking seams, and editing the Uv islands.
Have a look at my post in the following link of how to edit the UV islands. This is only a single material Upper and lower interior walls but its the same process for your 5 materials. Unwrap everything in one go, orientate the UV islands correctly then scale them all up together. Yes the UV islands have all been scaled up so that they extend well beyond the UV space but this is not a problem because we are not baking textures we are going to apply seamless textures to the model when rezzed in world.
The screenshot below shows where the single vertical UV seam is placed for the outer walls. We mark seams for the rest of the model in such a way that each material unwraps as a single UV island:
When finished your UV's should look something like in the gif below. Selecting by material to show the UV's of that material and at the end selecting all 3 material together to show how the stacked materials UV's look in the UV editor:
and this is how they look when a test grid image texture is applied to each material :
If the above all sounds too complicated I would suggest you take a step back and create a very simple rectangular room, no windows, no doorways and experiment with that so that you have exterior walls, interior walls and floor all assigned there own material, all UV unwrapped together, all orientated correctly and all scaled up together in such a way that the top of each walls UV's extend up to Y = 1 in the UV space. Import into SL and apply some seamless tileable textures.
If you want to take a closer look to see where I have placed UV seams in my model then you can download the .blend file from here : https://file.io/vEnCtPXUC9QA
-
Mesh and Li
in Mesh
19 hours ago, vanettda Lassard said:the simplified PHYS could be lower but it fits within my house needs. So you are saying that the PHYS model is causing the issue? I've had more complex PHYS files and never had this problem.
The final Land Impact cost will be the equal to the rounded up value of either the Download cost or the Physics cost, whichever is the highest.
If you upload with the Firestorm viewer you can check the Physics costs of your model before bringing it into SL.
At the bottom of the upload window there is a little Physics cost panel.
- Base Hull = the physics cost when the Physics Shape Type is left at the default Convex Hull.
- Mesh = the physics cost when the physics model was not Analyzed in the mesh uploader (for Triangle based Physics) and the Physics shape Type is set to Prim.
- Analyzed = the physics cost when the physics model was Analyzed in the mesh uploader and the Physics Shape Type set to prim. (Analysing converts the physics model uploaded in Step 1 of the Physics tab into a collection of convex hulls).
As a general rule, to reduce the Physics cost increase the average size of the triangles in the Physics mesh. This can be done, as Wolfie has already explained by reducing the complexity of the geometry and removing any small thin triangles (quads).
In the example below the physics model was not analysed (has a triangle count of 78). The Download cost = 1.835 and the Physics cost (Mesh) will be 0.5 when rezzed and set to Prim. LI will be 2 when rezzed.
Check the download and physics cost when reszzed by clicking on the more info text in the edit floater :
Below is an example of an Analyzed physics mesh. Analysing created a collection of 19 hulls which when the model is rezzed in-world and set to Physics Shape Type Prim would give a physics cost of 7, (6.92 round up). Each of these physics hulls usually costs 0.36, (19 x 0.36 = 6.84). :
-
1
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Model Building
in Mesh
Posted
A rough and ready way to reduce vertex count using the Decimate tool. (or Modifier) :