Rick Nightingale

Ahh... I wanted to call it something else but had no idea what; I'm not comfortable using the wrong terms for things. I think though if I say 'inverted hull method' to anyone else all I'll get is a blank stare until I say, "cell shading" with a defeated eye roll. Don't think I'll win that one now.

You can learn the way to do it with rezzed prims. Rez a sphere. Rez another in exactly the same spot, make that one a bit bigger (say 0.55 if the first is 0.5). Set the larger sphere maximum hollow and cam inside to give it a colour and a bit of glow on the inner face; the cell shading effect. Now set its outside transparent. A cell-shaded sphere!

LOL - Sorry, but blame the neighbours who are, once again, playing music next door so loud it's deafening in our house. I can't think straight. I didn't put my vertex in the right place. Simple. I'll PM you with a link to a blend file on my server in a minute. Just hide the phys model (because they overlap), edit the door, select Vertex selection mode and you'll see the extra, single vertex. Then you can check how I did the physics if you want although for an attachment that doesn't matter. Export it with SL presets and check it out. It works - pivot is right in the edge corner, where the hinge would be.

An original door uploads and works with the pivot exactly on the door hinge, as I expected. That's with a single vertex at the opposite bounding box corner. You can even see the pivot point in the mesh upload preview window if you rotate the preview. It rotates on the altered pivot point.

Attachment should not matter. Ignore all the following, I'm incompetent is all. Interestingly, I was going to send you a proof .blend and .dae... but when I uploaded it, instead of putting the pivot on the hinge edge, it put it in the centre of the edge. That's... very odd. I've checked an original door made just the same and it pivots exactly on the hinge. Just trying to figure out if I did anything different right now. Like I said though, I've been doing it just like this for years. I wonder if something changed, or I did something different this time. The LL Viewer and FS both did the same, and they did at least put the pivot on the edge of the visible mesh. Just not right on the corner, but in the middle of that edge. Hmmm... watch this space.

Strange because I've been using that for years, and it most certainly works. I can show you the doors! Lots of them. Perhaps it needs to be uploaded with Firestorm... I never use the LL viewer so perhaps there is some different behaviour. Which viewer do you upload mesh with?

Does anyone have any inside information on when PBR might go live? I'm not particularly waiting to buy things, but I do have some projects in Blender that would really benefit from PBR. Not sure if I should spend days/weeks texturing them 'traditionally' (my weak point - takes me ages of hard work to be content) if PBR might be just around the corner.

May I add one little trick to the 'extend the geometry' that I've used for years to make doors etc.? When you put that extra vertex at the opposite corner to where you want the pivot (to extend the bounding box), instead of making it a triangle, do this: When you've finished making the object, select that vertex you added, and go to the menu: Mesh/Sort Elements/Selected. Make sure Vertex is selected in the tool pop-up. Now, that vertex is the very first vertex in the database. While it will not be rendered in SL because it is a single vertex and gets optimised out, it still gets used when setting the bounding box because the first vertex cannot just be gotten rid of. Or something like that. It works, anyway. The benefits are there is not even a miniscule triangle to hopefully not see (or have to have a material for it so it can be made transparent) and it saves two vertices. Extra: If actually making a door, you also need to extend the physics model to the bounding box size of course. For physics, you can't use the single vertex trick so my physics model does have a tiny triangle ending at the same location as that vertex above (just for simplicity - doesn't actually have to be in the same place, it's just that I copy that vertex into the physics model to get the position right for the physics triangle). The door's own physics is a simple cube stretched to fit the visible door size. When uploading, Use Analyze with method set to Solid. That will eliminate the tiny triangle from the physics completely but leave the door's physics intact as per your physics model. If my door has knobs that project and I don't need physics for those, I'll make that tiny, extra physics triangle long enough to extend the bounding box 'thickness' to account for the extent of the knobs too. again it gets optimized out of the physics, leaves the door's actual physics as I want while extending the physics bounding box appropriately.

-

Leave my little guardian alone... or she'll chop you to pieces!

Sorted.

I've been trying to keep politics out of my comments, but the very same thing has been happening in the UK for years and over the last two to three has been rampant, blatant and unchallenged. It redoubled with the changes of prime minister as everyone knew it would; practically the first official act was another big tax break for the rich while the less well offs had cuts to income, benefits, health and welfare support, etc.. We keep beng told we have to endure austerity, and watch prices of everything double, yet here, all the big companies, supermarkets, energy/fuel suppliers and generally super-wealthy are showing record profits (literally record-breaking profits!) Perhaps that's why this annoys me so much too.

Perhaps one or other of us (probably both, since you thought I was blaming you and region owners earlier when I said nothing of the sort) is getting our wires crossed a bit. Best leave it there

Why do you seem to have a bone to pick with me? I don't want to have to pay extra to give region owners cheaper regions. Is that wrong of me? It's not even my opinion that that is what is happening... LL states it! How do region owners literally make SL? Sounds like you feel entitled to special treatment for being a region owner now. This is getting silly, isn't it?

@Phil Deakins Thank you for the unnecessary lecture. Perhaps to your surprise, I do have some experience of large companies up to middle management level and I have never, in four decades, seen one that does not operate with greed as the primary driving force. As to pay rises... I haven't had one that has kept up with inflation for twenty years. Neither has my wife. Both of us in highly professional areas. Yet the company high-ups and shareholders still get richer and richer. That's life. Doesn't mean I'm not going to complain about it. @Rowan Amore Saving US$240 a year is significant... they would have to spend US$4800 on L$ to pay that in increased fees.

@Charolotte CaxtonI don't think I said that you were taking my money - I know you aren't the one doing this and have nothing whatsoever against you. It's LL's doing, but the effect is still the same that region owners are saving money and others are paying for that - LL says that quite clearly. And I know LL isn't struggling... so why the need to increase prices... greed! It even gave me the thought, long before this conversation, that LL was trying to set region owners and non-owners against each other when I read the announcement.

@Charolotte Caxton The anouncement says (my highlighting): You are getting a cut - reduced region prices. LL has chosen to drop the price to people paying for regions, while increasing the costs of converting L$ to us to fund that. They have also said that regions can be paid for using L$ without the need to convert it to US$ first, saving the transactions fees. I don't know what cut of that is LL's vs Tilia's, but it's another 'loss' to be clawed back. It just seems unfair to give to one lot, while taking from another to pay for it. If LL is struggling to make ends meet... just raise prices across the board. I would complain a lot less about that. Edit: Region costs have been dropped U$20 per month. The change to conversion costs means my annual cost is going from US$15 to US$30. Only (another) $15 increase per year - but that increase (and more for buying L$) is going to hit a lot more people.

That's what annoys me the most... not the rise as such, but the fact that land owners are getting a cut while we pay more so they can. Seems often the case though that those who have least are expected to give more to those who already have more.

While the statement you are responding to might go a bit far, the vast majaority of people in SL simply cannot afford or justify the ridiculous cost of a region. I would love one, I really would... but I simply can't. Despite working all my life I've never been in a position to pay that. I don't even have a TV subscription or a license (UK - need to pay the government for a license to watch TV) This change benefits the minority, like you (and I'm glad you can afford a region) while taking away from the rest of us to pay for it, if we take the announcement at its word. If, as @Spiffy Voxelsays, people spend less because of this, it will hit small creators like me (and big ones too), so I'm being hit twice. LL are taking more off me when I have to renew my subscriptions, and I'll be earning less to pay for it. At the moment SL pays for itself (lucky me) but only just. I cannot afford to put money in any more. I'm also thinking the same about spending less in SL myself though; exactly along the same lines as Spiffy's. That will hurt other creators. If LL push it to the point that I cannot pay for what I need in SL to enjoy it the way I want, then I'll remove my store and leave. I'm not here just to socialise, which is free, I'm here for the stuff that needs paying for.

I'm sure LL thinks this will all blow over... people will forget. They have short memories. I don't forget, and this will impact my decision next time my and my wife's and alts' memberships are due.

The greedy never have a big enough cash machine, as long as someone else still has some money that isn't theirs... yet.

Yep - I just about balance, and that's it. Take just a bit more and I can't afford my land, my memberships... what do you think happens then LL? I'll turn into a freeloader, not contributing with money, not making anything because you don't deserve it and what's the point if I can't make enough L$ to keep going.

Ask and you shall receive. ----- But seriously, LL, I know from recent threads you give not a fig about your customers apart from the serious earners and land barons who get their way every time... but you really are pushing it. Talk about taking from the poor to feed the rich. Paying for sim owners to cover their fees by raising taxes on us all... disgusting. That's all I feel right now about you LL, disgusted.

So... taking from the poor to benefit the rich. Money grabbing *"£&**!!! You've made me wait just long enough to get the transaction limit raised on an account I've had for eight years (to sell L$ and pay for premium and name change) to get hit with this increased sell fee too. Oh LL... you really make me want to swear!!!

Sums it up. In the early days I had one that had figured out temp rezzers - his stuff just kept re-rezzing. No way to derender that. Turned out he was miffed at a previous occupant of the parcel, and he thought I was an alt of that person when I moved in so he put all the griefing stuff back out. Still totally childish behaviour, but that's people for you. At least in my case I was finally able to contact him and convince him I wasn't. Took two months though and I nearly sold up, but I really liked my bit of seafront land.