OptimoMaximo

The Bento skeleton has additional spine joints. If they have exported those joints animations too, they would be included in the hierarchy in their folded status, flipping a classic avatar's back like you experienced because the classic avatar doesn't use those joints, so the result to accommodate the missing hierarchy (present in the animation but not in the classic avatar) is being represented by a deformation due to the missing joints rotations and following adjustments, in my opinion. However,almost all the human mesh avatars don't use those extra joints in the body. Bento for those items is an human add on, ie hand anims and face anims. Try to see whether other avatars are affected by this, or if it happens also when you play the animation from inventory

Yes i meant this... sorry it didn-t work out... now i have to guess what random neko/lion is gonna come to post a lion pic... ;P

Try re-assigning the image to the object in edit mode, making sure all geometry is selected first, then proceed with the assignment in the UV Editor

TLDR, MistahMoose. By now we all learned what you are, and to leave your comments unread. Bye MR Triple A.

oh you looked up my free time full perms stuff MP, when i do actually do jobs for others, so yes i actually do make stuff here, bruh, when not doing 3D for RL jobs, too. So i do practice what i preach, but my work doesn't need to be visible to you. This is what creators do and think? Reality check: 1) LoD butchery is widespread due to laziness or incomptence 2) the fact that they do it doesn't condone a practice that is against a developer's common sense, given that the specs are in place, with all the issues that breaking the guidelines bring. Don't you think i would ask for the same, so it would be easier for me too, if i didn't know what actually impedes the delivery of what you claim? Yes dude, baking lighting and making maps for (and not from) that baked lighting is what works in SL, as the PBR's dull base colors, bruh, don't work if some shading detail isn't in the base texture. Bruh. Yes, you gotta face that the current architecture doesn't allow for such features you're claiming. Get over it. The specs is all you need to know and fall to. You won't get the 65536 vertices limit lifted, because the architecture, the binary format, doesn't allow it at the current state, and Lindens have, more than once, stated that they are,ìt going to mess up with the established asset architecture. And for last, the personal accusations: no, i don't have any issue in RL about being taken seriously. My only issue is with people like you, considering their opinion the best among the others and need to support and defend it to death, against those who actually have a clue about the matter, who are trying to explain to you why it's not possible. But you fight it all the way through without even trying to get info for yourself. AM i exhausting? Good, that's the strength that comes from having solid points. I'm not exhausted at all, easy peasy so far.

No, i'm not. The one who has to realize that those standards represent what for SL would have been possible only in the future, and those standards are not gonna happen here. Face it, get over it. It's a hybrid, bruh... blinn model based spec gloss with a base color instead of a diffuse and a metalness called environment to hold the lack from the actual diffuse. Don't you realize how ridiculous you sound with this? Yeah right you're one of the habitueé... Indeed you're right. There is always a way to reliably convert them to something usable for SL. Plus, if you use a PBR capable application you can always use those materials to bake out photorealistic textures anyway.

You can do whatever you like on your freaking land, but don't come here defending and condoning practices that are blatantly and unanimously wrong. The item type you so strongly defend is for sale, so your previous post claim that majority of users create for their own consumption doesn't hold for a fraction of a second.

Wrong, a tech director is a programmer that tells you what can go in and what not. You, as sim owner, at most can be an Art Director/Level Designer, who has to subdue to the tech specs, penalty given: asset refused. Not that the Art Director is given a choice, this guy gets tech-approved assets to work with and has to whip out a composed environment asset that falls within the TD's limit for this type of asset, even if the contained stuff is approved content to begin with. Quality comes when and IF you can see the items on your sim in the first place. This tool definitely will be a help for those people who seek quality content in the broader spectrum of features. Also, the assumption that this practice of yours is as good as any other is really presumptuous and shows a really crude ignorance about the matter at hand. Edit: and yes, i really hope more and more people would understand this tool as a quality check, so to drive all LoD butchers off business

Oh, and a little reminder, in case "but this happens on Firestorm, the official LL viewer allows such uploads" comes out: LL is the one that, at the time, left an exploitable hole for the creation of megaprims. Someone else might write the code more accurately. Just saying

Yeah i forgot that as ending statement! /me facepalms at himself

That is the whole point, bruh (as you say): realtime rendering environments are not made for high poly models. Game engines are not made for high poly models either, where the limit threshold of such definition may vary because it depends on many factors. It's not a "depends how you work" or "design choices" type of matter, it's a matter of following what a tech director would set as limit for the development of a specific product and its contents guidelines. The difference sits in SL where there's no enforcement of such guidelines. Your loose approach is somehow a claim that medium-high poly is acceptable in SL. Don't get me wrong, i do organic modeling and rigging, and 30K /40K polygons is an average number for triple A high end games type of characters, fully outfitted with all possible accessories (including the simpler hairstyles), not the naked body alone. They can get even a bit higher; however, they also do in separate assets to fall within what their realtime software is capable to handle, as per the tech director's estimation, both for rendering capabilities and file read speed . Perhaps you should read about the limits of the uploader and find your way to comply to them, instead of the brute-force type of approach "trying to get the uploader to accept my mesh" and saying that LL should help by improving the uploader is just the same type of claim.

He is, along with the other Masters of ZBrush, the exception, yes. I may be referring to everything too much in absolute terms as much as you refer to the same things with a too loose mentality, whereas you complain about issues in uploading models and i dont have mine ever being rejected by any of the game engines i work on, SL included. Again, when sculpting and you reached a good level of mastership over the software, you're free to move in the field as you like, exactly as i said earlier. It's the whole point of sculpting programs, that kinda freedom.However that isn' a mesh that can be digested by a realtime renderer. Retopology on it starts low poly to slowly increase detail where needed. Remeshers aren't the same as retopology. Might work, but it's not the same. No, i just assume that there may be some readers that may need the detailed info, and so i linearly go through the topic, period. The issue lays within your approach, where you say "if i didn't know about it now" when a few posts ago you say you have trouble making the model being accepted by the uploader in the first place, figure if one should optimize the mesh after that. Not a literal quotation, of course, but that's what you said. I would give more credit if you didn't efficiently show a lack of efficiency methodology in what you do. Think about it, you're basically saying "oh various methods are good, also mine, but i get a heck of a time to get the uploader to accept my meshes..." and it doesn't ring a bell in your mind about that, perhaps, the good old rules were set in place for a reason?

Sure thing you can, but it's not always going to work well. You're rebuilding an item in a usable state, and a polygon reduction function doesn't always treat the mesh well because of the retention feature constraints, forcing a little clean up work (if you want it optimized) and some shapes adjustments. Even in this case, it's just best to duplicate the high poly version and work on the duplicate for reduction, so that the highpoly surface stays as reference surface for a quick snap-everything-better-to-surface retopo session. The exception confirms the general rule. HE is the exception. The general rule, as explained in all manual, schools and course, still is the same. When you master a craftsmanship of any sort, then rules don't matter anymore. But you gotta get to master craftsman level before you can afford that.

Please, re-read my post. I was referencing also the retopo situation when i was mentioning map extraction. But even in this case, retopo is not the process of reducing the same model's density, it rather is the process of creating a lower polygon version of it, as a standalone item, where the high poly version is being trashed at the end of the process. So again, you still don't start high as, also in sculpting, you begin with an object that definitely is lower polygon cont, compared to the end result, and you then add detail and resolution as you go.

You talk about restriction, while i am talking about features. Few lines on a notecard can also contain a link to a short video where you show the method as step by step, now it's even easier to show the LoDs at any distance. Sure it requires Firestorm. Another restriction. Assuming that people can't be educated to work on better content that, in turn, makes their creations better just because of the risk of low ratings is exactly the same attitude of people like the tree creator in disguise' "choice" of totally neglecting LoDs. Because, in the end, you make full permission assets that are intended for the SL's version of Level Designers, basically someone who should technically be "in the works" and, perhaps, are craving to show off the best looking/best performing sim they can. But this is my opinion only.

Can i ask what is a 4K models? 4 K texture? However, aside from that, the UE4 LoD making editor does a pretty good job in almost all cases but it still suffers from a decimation type of approach. Smarter and better than SL's own LoD generator, still they recommend complex objects are better off having their custom LoDs. I don't remember any one failed upload to SL i attempted that wasn't my fault, forgetting to do something prior the export; if you understand the concept of "clean mesh" in terms of inputs and geometry it's not hard to figure out what doesn't work. It's not a matter of optimizing on top the troubleshooting of the misbehaving mesh which doesn't want to upload, it's more a matter of working optimized from start to end. Because it's easier to add geometry at later time, rather than remove it. And if the process implies the use of a high definition object, it's for maps extraction to fake those details on a low(er) polygon version of the same item. So yes, you build the same object twice in order to make it good, both looking AND technically.

It's what a developer does, Rya: document the work they intend to sell or give away to others to include in their projects. When you purchase a full perms script, the least you expect is that it contains fully commented code, so that you know what is done and where to modify it, don't you? It's how development material has always been. And you can certainly add a few lines to a notecard explaining why and how to do so. Perhaps this might be one of the reasons for some creators to keep their stuff no mod.

I will make you some, with these features: sculpted leaves, 4 different shapes, averaging a nice 65k vertices each each leaf will be split in 8 materials each material will carry a 1024 texture each texture will have also its own normal and specular map WITH alphas for more data to read (glossiness and environment) and finally, the Medium, Low and Lowest LoDs will be one tiny triangle i will upload separately to make sure it's small enough to never be seen at any distance Oh, and for good measure, aside from the LoDFactor you will have to push to this level described here , you will have to enable to enjoy real high quality How does it sound?

It is true, and it is a choice. And I guess it is because Li formulae, specifically on Second life. It's the choice of laziness and incompetence, nothing else.

This post is trolling And to pursuit in the same way, finally scultpy was maybe good enough No, not at all. I was serious in the meaning, aside from the fact that i was, and still am, laughing at you.

Well said @Chic Aeon

What i read is you looking for a way out to be able to hide the stats

Once again, read the thread in which you're posting: it "doesn't work" if you have a linkset with a prim as root, but cycling through the linkset shows the meshes' stats.

Indeed, classic 3D games have way more resource tools to optimize or obviate to some issues, that SL doesn't have. Put that on an online stream in realtime, versus a single player game that stands alone. If you want to keep the platform usable, those few available tools need to be used, period. There is no design choice, it is either pure ignorance about the matter or laziness in making a model game-almost-ready. Being a multi part object doesn't really matter, it is again laziness in not exporting each part and re-assemble it inworld. Everything can not be 1 LI as the customers demand. And that is the reason for LL to increase prim allowances on simulators in the first place. Seeing stuff popping into existence SUCKS, no design choices, period.

LoDs are being constantly put in all 3D games, and the more power the graphics engine consumes/the lower profile the target hardware, the stricter LoDs policies are. What is seriously ridiculous is the lack of proper LoDs enforcement. Sure thing all the uploader related stuff mentioned earlier need a overhaul, still it's not sufficient to just ignore LoDs.