Zakiel Windlow

HI everyone. Just wondering what I've asked: Anyone else with the same issue? I've request a payment of $160 to my Paypal account on 2015-10-25 (Sunday). As you can see, is not a big ammount, but 12 business days have passed and it is still "in progress". Never had this issue before, and always got my requests "Completed" in no more than 7 business days. I've already contacted support, but I'm waiting for their answer. Thanks in advance. SOLVED (or close too): Well the support answered pretty fast and, indeed, I need to provide more personal info (did this, well 4-5 years ago). Until I provide this info, my requests will remain on hold. Thanks!! *** Spanish version *** Hola a todos. Simplemente me preguntaba lo que dice el título: Alguien más con el mismo problema? Hace 12 días (comerciales) solicité un pago a mi cuenta de Paypal, por una suma de $160 dólares (no mucho) y aún está en proceso, cuando siempre sólo se demoraron 7 días comerciales, como mucho. Nunca tuve este problema y ahora estoy algo... "Preocupado". Ya contacté al soporte pero estoy esperando su respuesta. Así que eso: Alguien más con el mismo problema? Desde ya, muchas gracias =).

Thanks very, very much for sharing this. Time to read and learn more! Gonna check that stuff about the normals and also, I hope find something about planar UV Maping; because the "pelt" is fast but dunno. For some reason it's not used in the game industry and have to find why

Yeah!! It's working! Next time I'll be more patient, I think :matte-motes-big-grin-squint: (Anyways, what confused me was the ability to log in with an alt and not with my main)

@Octavio: Yap, I knew about the scheduled maintenance (Yes, I've clicked the hyperlink in the error message :matte-motes-wink:) @Mikka So sad. After a lots of tries, I changed my password but, as you said, is not registering; I'm still using the old password in Aditi :matte-motes-dont-cry:. Maybe in a few hours everything would be fine. (Still cannot log in with this account but my alt connects just fine)

Oh! Thank you very much! Then, it's just a matter of time. Thought that my inventory or something like that got bugged. (Two in distress makes sorrow less...)

Since Monday, 10.30 or 11 pm PDT. I've tried with an alt and can log in in just fine. Then, I've tried that same region in this account (the one that cannot connect) and nothing, the problem persists. Also tried different regions (sandbox test, morris, cordova). I can connect without problems to the normal grid. Note: That Monday I was testing a shirt in the beta grid (a normal, default shirt; not mesh or sculpt). When I uploaded the texture that I was testing (4th upload, .TGA texture with alpha layer) and applied it to the shirt, the viewer displayed a message that I cannot remember right now. But the point is that the texture couldn't be applied and the shirt was taken off (and couldn't wear it again). Since then, I couldn't log in. Could be an inventory problem? Could be that item/texture the cause? How come? It is just a normal shirt =S Thanks in advance. Firestorm viewer: SL Viewer:

@DerpWolf That looks pretty nice! Gonna take a look at that. Thanks for sharing. @Astrid: Yeah! Flexies are flexies :matte-motes-frown: (I miss them) My idea is to use this just in clothes, like a fur coat or something like that. Btw, it's nice to have many options for the same "problem": Would love to mix all of them

OMG Gaia!! I really was expecting your answer, because all of these was driving me crazy! Didn't know if it was my mesh, Blender, Avastar, the .OBJ exporter, .OBJ importer... Bleh Hopefully I will find some workaround, like working on a real symmetrical mesh and then transferring the weights to the "non symmetrical" (it is but for Blender is not )... Thanks again for your reply. Now I can relax a bit and think in the solutions and steps to change in my workflow.

I see :matte-motes-frown: As I thought, the normal maps couldn't do the magic. And yes, I understood that your suggestion was for a fur ball with very "short hair" :matte-motes-big-grin-squint: In that case, of course, the normal map would be enough. The following example (mess) would be my workaround (have to test it in a "real" mesh): (some geometry coul be deleted here and there, but it is just an example :matte-motes-silly:) Orange and green geometry would have the hair texture+normal+alpha map applied. The "core" (the blue object) just the hair texture + normal map. If needed, I could deform the "cones" (3rd segment) but I think that with a well done alpha would be enough. The green geometry is there to "hide" the geometry/shape of the cones. After doing the modeling and UVMap, I would attach all the geometry (in order to have only one object) and model/deform it in ZBrush (using the transpose and move tools). I repeat: Have to test it :matte-motes-tongue; but it is the workaround that was in my mind for months and didn't have the opportunity to use/test it in an SL model yet. And I know that won't be flexy, that's not a problem in this case :matte-motes-big-grin-wink:, because it won't have a very long hair. PS: I saw this "concept" being used in the past with the flexy and sculpted prims; so if it worked back then, should work now...I think lol Thank you very much for the reply!! :matte-motes-wink: And to the OP too.

Astrid, One question (I didn't test it yet but one of my future projects will have these sort of detail): I use ZBrush too and I understand that you would use the normal map exported from it in SL to generate or simulate the fuzziness? Right? I'll put one example: Lets say I have a ball and I want it to have a "hair", 2 cm long (or more), perpendicular to the surface of the sphere. Does the normal map alter the geometry of the surface in a way that you do see the hair popping out of the surface? Because I thought it would only add the "illusion" of bumpiness, but if you look at the surface, it would be smooth, with no hair popping out. I repeat: have to test it (I'm not in my PC right now). How I've planned to do it? Well, I would do the modeling of the base geometry, lets say "the ball" with normal map applied and then, I would add lot of faces arranged along/around it, with the hair texture (+ alpha map for transparency). Yap, a lot of work. If you don't understand what I mean -because of my English-, I would do it like the "old" prim hair were/is done : Sculped prims (my base mesh) + flexy prims (faces/polygons arranged around it). Another example are some flexy prim skirts, with several layers arranged one over the other. But I'll try the normal map in SL! I haven't played enough with it yet. Maybe it saves me a lot of work. (I'm coming back from a long "break" of SL and these Normal/Specular maps are kinda new to me; weren't here when I "left" almost 11 months ago)

UPDATE: Well, now I'm feeling the lack of theory that would let me understand what is happening. I've did some more testings with the "Test Box" and here are the results: 1) In 3DS Max I deleted half of the model, applied a mirror modifier and exported as .OBJ 2) In Blender: X-Mirror is working!! But ONLY with Topology Mirror deactivated. Tested the same with a symmetry modifier and works in the same way. Why did I do this test? Because, in the case of the first two models, in the first step of my workflow. I modeled only one half in 3DS Max, then applied a Mirror/Symmetry modifier and jumped to ZBrush for the details. Now, this is when I feel the lack of theory: Why?? Why does it work with a mirror modifier applied before the export? Because, if you look at the model, it's the same (its topology) with or without the mirror modifier! Somebody can explain me this? Or link me some stuff to read abut, because in almost 4 years this is the 1st time I'm facing this problem u.u. I just wanna learn and understand what is happening "in the background". Thanks again in advance.

Thank you very much for the reply Astrid! Yap, you said it: it's is a good puzzle :matte-motes-confused: but I don't want to give up, yet. I'm going to try your suggestion. Dunno, maybe it works. At this point I don't know what to do, so every suggestion is welcomed. And as far I know, it is just an x-mirror problem, because the topology of the models seems right. Dunno, maybe has something to do with the gizmos/axis and rotation of the model before exporting? Thought was that when I found this post: http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?179518-Rigging-in-x-axis-(Blender-2-5) Now, if you compare the local axis of the first 2 meshes with the axis of the test box, you can see that: - The first 2 meshes use the -X/X axis for forward and -Z/Z axis for up. - But the "test box" uses -Y axis for forward. Thought this could be the cause, but while I was writing this, I've rotated the local axis of the test box (to X forward, Z up) in 3DS Max, exported, imported, applied weights and nope, X-Mirror won't work. About the workflow of the first 2 meshes: 1) 3DS Max: Basic/box/low poly modelling >> 2) ZBrush: Subdivide and add details/texture >> 3) 3DS Max: Baking >> 4) Blender: Rigging/Skinning But, in the case of the test box, I've just created it in 3DS Max and exported as .OBJ to Blender. This would be the first step in my workflow. Maybe something changes during every step? Dunno, I'm just throwing stupid ideas in here :matte-motes-sour:

Hi! Well, for almost 1 week I've been facing this problem and I'm reaching the point where I want to give up; really, I don't know what to do. Probably it's a silly thing that I cannot figure out. Problem: On SOME models (.OBJ) imported from 3DS Max: 1) During Weight Paint, X-Mirror is not working 2) Weights are not applied symmetrically 3) Weights are applied symmetrically but X-Mirror doesn't work. 4) X-Mirror not working in "double sided" meshes, but do work whenI delete the inner geometry. Context and details: This is my workflow: ZBrush <> 3DsMax > Blender. I've decided to learn Blender just to try out the rigging/skinning tools (like Avastar) and, in the process, learn the other functions and tools that Blender offer. All was going fine, until I tried to import my second object to Blender from 3DSMax, when I started to get the problems listed before. What I've tried so far: From 3DS Max: 1) Exporting as .fbx/.dae: X-Mirror works but I get a model composed of triangles. This becomes a problem when I try to edit it in Blender. 2) Exporting as any other format supported by Blender: X-Mirror doesn't work. I've "played" with the export/import options in 3DS Max and Blender for the .OBJ, but can't find out the correct setup (if this is the cause). Really dunno what to do or what I'm doing wrong. Here some screenshots: 1) These are my settings for export/import. 2) This image is from 3DS Max and is here so you can see the local axis and the global axis (lower left corner). (This was the first mesh imported in Blender. The inner geometry was deleted.) 3) Imported in Blender. Did some weight paint with X-Mirror and is working (Note the the weights are not symmetrical, dunno why...) 4) Second mesh: Image from 3DS Max son you can see both axis (again): Local and global. 5) Once imported in Blender, X-Mirror is not working. Its inner geometry is still there. 6) Just for test purposes: In Blender, I deleted the inner geometry and the little piece of the back. You can see that X-Mirror seems to be working now. 7) This is my "test box": You can see that X-Mirror is not working again. 8) Second test: Deleted the top and bottom faces, making a hole. Not working either. 9) 3rd test with the "test box": Did the UVMapping just to discard "one more thing" and nothing, you know the result. Help? Any ideas? Is actually the inner geometry the cause of the problem? But how that explains, then, the results on my test box? I'm ok with deleting the inner faces but need to know for future reference if I need a double sided mesh. I know I can use solidify and copy weights, but that would mean that Blender can't handle double sided meshes? And again: My test box is not double sided and X-Mirror is not working :matte-motes-dont-cry: Thanks in advance.

Should be a way! :matte-motes-big-grin: but I'm pretty new to Blender and I still do that in 3DS Max. I mean: If I can do it in 3DS Max, I'm pretty sure there is a way in Blender PS: Sorry if I'm not giving you the answer or solution; but I wondered this myself, because I want to migrate to Blender asap. Edit: This is what I found with a quick search. I'll bookmark this too for future reference :matte-motes-bashful-cute-2: https://www.google.com.ar/#q=blender%20shadow%20map%20bake

Hi Jaxon! As Astrid said, one way is to upload your normal maps to SL. You may know that you can get those in ZBrush using the Multimap exporter (normal, Displacement, diffuse, etc.). I only use the GoZ to edit the topology, UVMaps, etc. in 3Ds Max. When I have finished in ZBrush, I export all using MMExporter, even the .OBJ file. Once you have all exported from ZBrush, the other way, is to bake all the textures (diffuse+normal bump+displacement map) in maya and upload it baked to SL. In SL, the mesh without bump textures will look as your example: Plain with no details. With the baked texture, you know, you can "simulate" all those wrinkles, lights, shadows. Edit: Added image: From left to right: 1) Mesh without any texture 2) Mesh with baked texture (Baked in 3DS Max. No bump or specular maps added in SL) 3) Only Normal Map applied in SL. 4) Diffuse map + Normal Map + some Low default Shininess added (so you can see the bumpiness )

@Natales: Thanks for your reply and the time! It answers many questions I had and explains the context around all this fitted mesh; context I wasn't aware of. As I said, in my case, my future "fitted creations" will be composed of 2 or 3 sizes, or 2 o 3 different weights values (have to test all these). For example:Testing, I've noted that I "need" more weight over the breast for high values; and vice versa for low values. For low values, seems better to have those vertex controlled by the chest and not the pecs (because the mesh is pulled inside the avatar and the chest seems to keep them in their place). And as you said, the demo is a must, no doubt. @Sassy: You got a good point. God, I hadn't thought about those situations . I see that a lot of testing will be needed. Thanks again, for your replies!

Yap, despite the promotional video, i'm seeing now that it is pretty limited and I will need to relax (my obsession) and don't expect too much (from my skills and from the technology). I mean, I cannot spend like 3 days (or more) trying to get the perfect fit. I'll have to see/evaluate which cases are the "best" for each skinning mode. (Omg, and loled with your last sentence, because I'm being fussy about that "tracking" ) And about the X-Mirror: Works when I export it from 3DS Max as .FBX (it is converted from editable poly to editable mesh). Don't know why it works with FBX and not OBJ. I'll have to do some more research about this, but for now, I'll export/import as FBX and "problem solved"

Well, dunno how to reply/quote both of you in the same post (without using copy/paste), but thanks very much. @Sassy: Having more than one size (or weights) of the fitted mesh was something that came to my head yesterday, doing some testings. Maybe just 2 meshes are enough to cover the full range and combinations of the sliders. 2 different sizes or 2 meshes with different weights. I need to test it. And about this: Sassy Romano wrote: With standard sizes, although I don't like them, the shape is a given and won't vary and most people understand that they may have to make a shape tweak to fit but once done, most stuff will work with little tweaks here and there. Fitted mesh is all over the place in terms of how people rig it. It's a pure subjective guess that probably 80% of the potential customer base are already at a point where they'll accept standard sizes (of which there is a LOT already available) so the fitted mesh initiative requires far more work to chase the final 20%. Sensible? no. Thanks. Calms me down a bit. I'll try to do both, standard and fitted; but standard will be my priority for now; because I can use 2 or more meshes of the standard sizing to do the fitted rigging. Again, have to test. @Gaia Thought that the Avastar sliders worked exactly as the SL ones! I mean, what I saw and tested in Avastar looked almost the same in SL. Anyways, is a LOT better than the avatar available for 3DS Max, which has no sliders. That's why I decided to buy it and learn Blender (Note: Not with this resident/account) What I didn't understand is this: Gaia Clary wrote: But note, weighting and exporting of fitted mesh items just works as expected, and as long as you work with classic weighting (to mBones only) also the shape sliders work as intended. I'm using this workflow. Sorry if I didn't get the idea of what you wrote An about the X-mirror Made a quick search in google and is related to the object origin. My bad for not doing this before. Gonna try to fix it and see what happens. Anyways, doesn't explain why some parts of my mesh are ignored by the weights . Thanks, very much, for your replies! PS: Can't believe I've been in SL for almost 6 years and this was my first post

Hi everyone. First of all, forgive my English. It's not my first language and I've lost a lot of practice but i'll do my best. Second: Thank you very, very much in advance if you take the time to read this wall! 1st issue: Well, few days ago I started to use Blender/Avastar because of the "new" fitted mesh. After a lot of excitement, work and tweaking I discovered that in the case of the breasts for example, when the mesh "perfectly" fit a size of 90+, probably wont work for a 20-. The same for cleavage or buoyancy (or the mix of the 3). Here some examples (with comments): Img 1 Img 2 Img 3 Img 4 Img 5 Img 6 Img 7 Img 8 Related to this, I'll quote Gaia, in this post: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Mesh/Using-standard-SL-mesh-as-fitted-mesh-base/td-p/2657514 Gaia Clary wrote: Facts of Second Life: Fitted Mesh deformations work entirely different compared to the Morph based deformations of the SL Avatar. There is especially no way to make the fitted mesh fit to the exact vertex location of the avatar shape (when you change the slider values) That means, even a perfect mesh copy of the SL Avatar will deform differently than the original. All you can get is to make it fit reasonably well to ONE single shape and small deviations (regarding slider settings). The farther away you move the sliders from your initial shape the less well will it fit. Don't get trapped bty the wording "fitted mesh" does not mean "one fits all" :matte-motes-grin: 1) Then, is it nearly impossible to do a perfect fit for the breast sizes? (In this case) 2) Or am I doing something wrong? I spent a LOT of hours painting weights, adding and subtracting, just to realize that in the end it won't fit; or the fitting changes when I touch the sliders. At this point, it's easier and faster for me going back to the standard sizes; but I want to believe that this will work. Have to. 3) Any advice or workaround? 4) Can you see any issue with my weights? 5) Or this is expected? 2nd issue (this, for me, is the worst): X-Mirror (and topology mirror) Images:Img 1 Img 2 Img 3 Well, for the previous example (the vest), I could paint weights mirrored using topology mirror. Worked just fine, but was only 1 object. In this example,you can see that is a mesh composed of a few objects (all attached in 3DS Max): the heart, the neck stripe, the stars. X-Mirror and topology are not working in none of those. You can also see that the weights are applied in an strange way (strange for me, that can't figure out what is happening): For example, the front heart isn't affected by the breast (standard fitted mesh weights applied). But this issue won't be a big deal if I could paint the (mirrored) weights. Then, for the X-mirror and topology mirror issue: 6) The compound mesh is the problem? 7) What should I do in this case? 8) Does it only works in single objects? (not attached) I've already deleted, duplicated and renamed the vertex group from one side, but when I try to mirror it, just fails. (Reference: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Doc:2.6/Manual/Modeling/Meshes/Vertex_Groups/Weight_Paint_Tools) Final thoughts and questions: A few weeks ago I was using a workflow that gave me good, fast and (more or less) SAFE results: Standard rigging and 5 or 6 sizes (or more). But I wasn't happy, anyways. I always wanted the "fitted" mesh so all the girls could use my clothes without problems or restrictions. That was what I thought or was expecting. Now I realize that with the fitted mesh there are restrictions too; and the workflow (for now) is harder, longer and not safe as the standard rigging. I have to check the fitting with big breasts, small breasts, big+high, big+low, small+high, small+low, big+close, big+open, big+high+close... You get the idea... And what works for 1 combination probably won't for the other... The final question is: 9) Will people like and buy a mesh that is not fitted? (If I have to go back to my previous workflow) Because I fear that nobody will buy a mesh that is not fitted: Because fitted is new, is the "future" and the standard sizes are old, the past. It's sad. I was so excited, for me it really was the future: "No more sizes!" "Perfect fit for everyone!" but since I'm testing the fitted mesh I'm just finding "issues". It's ok, only if I can fix those issues(and you can see that I'm testing with pretty high poly meshes, that allows me more "detail" with the weight paint. Wonder how would work the fitting with a low poly mesh). Again: 10) Am I doing something wrong? 11) Or I should not expect more from the fitted mesh? Well, that's all, I think. Thank you very much if you read all this wall of text! Really! PS: Please, don't get me wrong: I'm not complaining!! After a lot of testing and reading I finally decided to come to the forums because I feel a bit lost. Yap, and sad, but I knew from the beggining (5 years ago I think) that nothing is easy in SL and maybe (probably) I'm the one that is doing something wrong.