Magnanimousity

A HUD is a scripted object designed for a specific purpose. A HUD can be used with anything it's made for, whether it's prims, avatar animations, sounds, or mesh! However, they can't be used with anything they're not made for, so if you're trying to use a HUD that's made for... Let's say it's made for changing the texture of a clothing item, it's only going to work with that clothing item and only for changing the texture of that specific item.

I'm using the wing bone chain as a set of torso limbs, but I've run into a bit of an issue specifically with the Wing4 bones. I'm not really sure why this is happening, every other bone in the chain works as expected. I've applied the bone reposition as the rest pose, I've checked multiple times that it's rigged to the correct bone, I've looked at and compared every single setting I could find and they're not any different between the Wing4 bones and any other bone. I've tried everything I can think of but nothing seems to change it in the slightest. I'm using avastar 2.0-23 with blender 2.77, if that makes much of a difference. This issue doesn't seem to happen with the bento angel demonstration av from what I can tell? I'd really appreciate some help if anyone has any idea what might be going on. Thank you! Edit: Another thing to note is that it follows the rest of the bone chain just fine when they move.

With all the Paws heads you'll have to do some modification to your shape to make the eyes fit into your head, it should've come with a notecard giving instructions on what slider settings you need for it to be ideal. Don't move them around in edit mode, it'll cause more problems than it fixes because then they won't be centered on the eye bones.

Linden Lab has to abide by United States law, since it's based in California. Under 18 is still considered legally a minor in the US, and most states have their age of consent as 18, California being one of them. I'd say play it safe and just age the character up to 18 if you want them to be pregnant/a parent, it's not that much of a difference and it makes sure that you won't get in trouble with anyone.

Many omega appliers have mutliple buttons to let you pick which layer the applier puts the texture on. Do any of the appliers have something like this? If not, do the LOGO heads let you take off the layers? If they do let you take off the layers, one work-around would be to take one layer off, apply the texture, take the layer with the texture off, put the other layer on, and repeat. It's a little tedious, but whatever works, right? If all else fails, contact the creator of LOGO for help, most creators are pretty good about customer support.

I don't see a reason why the animated heads couldn't be updated to Bento by the creator of the heads. As of right now they use attachment point rigging, which is where you take some of the attachment points, use a deformer, and animate them as normal bones for whatever you're doing. It's complicated and a pain in the butt to do, and obviously not ideal in the long run. Updating them to Bento would break existing animations for it and take a good while, but in the long run it'd be easier on the creator and have more variety in what it can do. However, Alwin is right. Everything already existing will still work, it'll all still look amazing, it'll just have less features than Bento. There's nothing stopping you from getting another head down the line after Bento is released, you'd just have something to use in the mean time! By the time one comes out that you like, you'll probably have already gotten the money to get it again.

Well, it depends on how long you're willing to wait. There's no solid ETA on when Bento will arrive, and it might be a while after that still before someone makes a mesh head in a style you like. If you're willing to save your money and wait until whenever that day comes, definitely wait until Bento! If not, I have friends who swear by Catwa's rigged heads and all are glad they invested in one, because the heads are so nicely made.

That was a very well thought out response, thank you. I'll be clear here: I'm at least somewhat involved in both communities in this discussion. I'm a gay man, I'm very familiar with what makes a twink or a femboy, I was very breifly involved in SL femboy groups a couple years ago. However, I'm also involved in kid roleplay communities both on and off SL for many personal reasons, mainly involving childhood abuse that I'd rather not go into detail on. Being in both groups as well as being an abuse survivor makes me hypervigilant about any potentially pedophilic content. Gay men have had a long running stigma of being percieved as pedos, child roleplayers are often accused of being pedos even if nothing even vaguely suggests it. Stuff like bondage gear for a mesh body that's intended to be a child (even if it's being used to make an adult avatar) hurts the communities on a base level because it strengthens that pedophilic tie to both. I'm not telling people not to use the SMB body to make adult avatars if they so wish, but y'all also have to realize that it is intended as a child body, that's what many people use it for, and without context that what you're making is supposed to be for the people who use it as an adult, it looks extremely bad for everyone involved. People will see it as a child avatar before seeing it as a femboy if they're familiar with the brand of body.

Pixieplumb Flanagan wrote: ffs, so, if this bothers you then AR it, report it. If it remains, LL are OK with it. That's the end of it, whatever Mag and Prok think. Since I assume you HAVE reported/AR'd this, and since you both still seem awfully cross, I guess LL didn't act. So, pull up your big girl panties and deal. I'm not cross, my original question that inspired this thread was just asking if it was worth doing AR reports for these kinds of things or not, and people seem to be misunderstanding why exactly I'm upset about it so I've been trying to clarify. I don't want to waste Linden Lab's time with AR reports that won't go through, that's why I was asking about the policies. (Also I'm a guy, nice assumption there )

entity0x wrote: No matter what anyone says, an avatar is not a child. If two adults in SL want to 'age-play' or 'role-play' their first kiss using child avatars, that is up to them. No children are involved, only adults. An avatar cannot be a sexual object by itself, only the person wielding the avatar can do that. A picture of a child avatar in a bikini also is not child pornography. One cannot tell the intent, or even assume the use of, a child avatar in SL. THough it is not my cup of tea, unless you were to observe private SL users with child avatars and spy on them - there is no reason to suspect they are using the avatars in the parameters that a virtual world like SL allows. If you can't look at an innocent picture (or advertisement) of clothing for a child avatar - without sexualizing it - perhaps the issue is more in your mind than it is in the sellers'. Also, even if there were 'questionable' activity by consenting adults in SEcond Life, and whether or not I find the subject/action/fetish disgusting - I will defend any roleplay by any (ADULT VERIFIED ACCOUNT), do do what ever they please. - SECOND LIFE IS A VIRTUAL WORLD, NOT THE REAL WORLD. Addendum: Hopefully such questionable activities should be restricted to private sims only;. I don't believe the femboi-humping dude or the dog-humping dude observed in the Premium default user homes was appropriate... The ageplay policy says otherwise. It's a matter of legality and publicity issues (see the german news outlet that lead to the ban of ageplay) rather than just strict morals here. Linden Lab doesn't want ageplay content of any kind to exist after they were publicly aired out for it. I asked the original question wanting to know if this was content that was allowed for child avatars to have, I was told it was as far as anyone could tell even if it was distasteful, I left it at that until this discussion was brought up. I contacted support and they refuse to comment on the situation, so we're just kinda left in the dark on this for now.

Theresa Tennyson wrote: Magnanimousity wrote: Theresa Tennyson wrote: The default system avatar can be made into a child's body. By your logic, doesn't that mean that there's an issue when clearly sexually inclined content is made for the default avatar? No, because the system body isn't a child by default. How is the SMB body a child "by default"? The body needs to be worn over a shape to be usable and it will take the height of whatever shape you're wearing. If your shape is 8 feet tall, guess what? You've got a very slender 8 foot tall avatar. The SMB mesh body with those outfits could certainly be used for prohibited behavior. The same body and outfits with different settings can be used for non-prohibited behavior. You can say exactly the same thing about the system avatar.  It's made for the purpose of being a child. Anything made for it is by default made for a child avatar.

Theresa Tennyson wrote: The default system avatar can be made into a child's body. By your logic, doesn't that mean that there's an issue when clearly sexually inclined content is made for the default avatar? No, because the system body isn't a child by default.

Theresa Tennyson wrote: Magnanimousity wrote: Theresa Tennyson wrote: Magnanimousity wrote: Hi, I'm the original poster of that question. I'd like to clarify that the literal full name of that avatar is "#SMB Mesh Body for Kids." Even if twinks and fem boys use it, that doesn't make it not a child avatar because that's it's intended use. I'm 50 years old. I just read a "children's book." Does that make me a child? That's false equivalence. You're not doing anything to come off as a child, people using a mesh body clearly labeled as being a child are doing something to come off as being a child. It's a mesh body. Full stop. And it's one of the very few available that is useful for a slender person while also having a variety of clothing for it, which means it's useful for people who want that sort of body even if it was made for being a "child" and they aren't portraying a "child." The issue here is that the SMB body is by default a child avatar. There is nothing spcifying that the clothing I was using as an example were made explicitly for twinks/femboys, which is my issue here. I'm not arguing that people can't use it as a twink/femboy body with the shape altered, the issue comes in when there's clearly sexually inclined content made for it, because it's a child avatar by default.

Theresa Tennyson wrote: Magnanimousity wrote: Hi, I'm the original poster of that question. I'd like to clarify that the literal full name of that avatar is "#SMB Mesh Body for Kids." Even if twinks and fem boys use it, that doesn't make it not a child avatar because that's it's intended use. I'm 50 years old. I just read a "children's book." Does that make me a child? That's false equivalence. You're not doing anything to come off as a child, people using a mesh body clearly labeled as being a child are doing something to come off as being a child.

Hi, I'm the original poster of that question. I'd like to clarify that the literal full name of that avatar is "#SMB Mesh Body for Kids." Even if twinks and fem boys use it, that doesn't make it not a child avatar because that's it's intended use. Edit: I think some of y'all need to brush up on the fact that there are laws in the US (where Second Life is hosted) that disallows simulated child porn such as with child avatars. Additionally here's the page for Linden Lab's policy on child avatars. Also, my distaste with the speedos isn't the clothing in and of itself, it's the deliberiately sculpted bulge on it. My issue with the bikini is the focus being the girl's butt.

Occasionally while browsing clothing for my child avatar, I find clothing that seems very sexually suggestive, but I'm never quite sure whether to report it or not because of Linden Labs policy on child avatars not being very clear past blatantly sexual content. So far today I've seen fishnet crop tops paired with speedos with large bulges for a preteen boy, micro bikinis for a preteen girl avatar where the ad picture is focused on her rear, and backless leather chaps paired with a thong for a preteen boy avatar. These all make me very uncomfortable and I avoid it wherever possible, but I seem to have an unfortunate knack for finding them even at in-world malls, and I'm wondering whether I should start reporting them or not. Edit: Since there seems to be some confusion, I'll give some examples (with indentifying store info censored out, I don't want to incite harrassment if there's "nothing wrong.") The SMB body is marketed as being a child avatar, and is clearly intended to be a pre-teen. All of these are marked as general on the MP and I found the first 3 in a mall targetted towards child avatars. This issue isn't just limited to the SMB body, but it's the most notable that I've seen. 

No, I'm not saying it's a bad idea because people are "stupid," I'm saying it's a bad idea because it'd reduce compatibilty between avatars while also straining the servers more than they would need to be. The beauty of the current system is that no matter how something is created, how the skeleton is shifted around and distorted, you can use the same techniques for creating animations and rigging compatible objects. My main worry with the introduction of custom skeletons is that there would be nothing stopping some more talented creators from creating "branded" skeletons, ones that would only be compatible with approved products. As it is, some creators are very guarded about what can and cannot be created for their avatars, and I'm worried that issue would only be driven further. Of course, some of these would flop, but when the highest quality or only product available for what you're looking for is set up like, that, of course it would succeed. Bento's skeleton is very robust. It can be made into almost anything, provided you have some creativity with how you alter it. Currently, I'm making a cartoony mesh avatar that swaps the arm and the wing bones to achieve more expression in the wings, while still having the same number of bones in the arms for animation. There's a ridable dragon mount being created solely using the bones introduced in Bento; There's mermaid tails, centaurs, fully animated pets, I've seen people playing with using the wing bones for hair. I've seen hints of gorgeous, realistic bird wings using just what's given for the wing bones. The limit is only how much work you're willing to put into making something happen, custom skeletons wouldn't make it any easier, it'd just complicate everything further. I you kinda lost me when you started talking about using animated skeletons in rezzable objects though... Edit: Also, with Bento you can put wings on your arms or your head. It just requires you to edit the bone positions and make custom animations. You could totally make a car avatar, very easily in fact. It'd only require, at most, 12 bones to be rigged to.

Himechan wrote: I recognize I'm late to the party, but this is clearly a step in the right direction to add more possibilities. I'm not sure it's entirely on topic, but it's about how I think skeletons should progress, so I think it's on topic enough. However I would propose that you make it possible to add a completely custom skeleton (mayhaps after this project is done). This will suit everyone's needs, regardless of what it is. There should be a list of standard joint and bone names or IDs that current animations and meshes will map to. But in addition to these, you could make whatever you want. Attachment points would be added to the skeleton by the designer and the viewer would download the skeleton information and dynamically change its attachments support accordingly. The current attachment points have their standard names and locations, but other can be added as well and scripts functions will return those names based on the custom skeleton. If an attachment point can be targeted by a function, it returns a -1 if it doesn't find it. In addition to that, please make it possible to rez skeletons inworld and dress them up with objects and animate them as you would an avatar. The skeleton object would have folders in its contents window for each of the attachment points and objects dropped in those folders are automatically worn and can be edited as a linked object as if it was worn on your avatar. Remove the object from the folder and it is removed from the skeleton object. And lastly, higher capacity for simultaneous attachments or a way to faux-link objects so that they are still their own objects, but are linked together so that they can be put on as a single object on an attachment point. But they still retain their own local link numbers. It's getting hard to wear modern complex avatars and add accessories to them due to the low capacity. Sadly, while at the base level this suggestion seems fine, even helpful, there's multiple reasons why this isn't a good idea. First and foremost, many creators aren't well versed on optimization and would likely add way more bones than are needed, causing unnecissary strain to many people's already struggling computers and internet connections. Another very big issue is that many people would create their own custom skeletons for everything, removing the animation compatability that's so integral to have between mesh avatar creators and stand-alone animation creators, not only frustrating people who didn't know or didn't understand that a custom skeleton was being used, but also potentially tanking businesses and forcing people to use only compatible animations created for whatever specific avatar they're using. With the introduction of custom skeletons, where would be the incentive to use the system skeleton anymore, if you could make more money for yourself by not using it? Lastly, the system handling the skeleton and animations would likely have to have major recoding done to allow a custom skeleton to be used at all. Sliders wouldn't be compatible at all no matter what, because as I understand it, the sliders are tied to specific bones. The introduction of Bento will be plenty. People have worked around the system skeleton for as long as it's been around, and with this it'll be much easier to do, well, everything. There won't have to be 10 different meshes layered on ton of each other to create different expressions, there will be less intense scripting and alpha face-switching "animation" which will take a load off the server.

wherorangi wrote: when faced with choices, choose a) or b) bc you cant have c) bc current technical limits and limted resources/staff to apply to the issue, then I choose a) not sure how anyone is failing to understand this What I think you're failing to understand here is that not everyone uses human avatars, or even the same style for human avatars, and as such need different things to be able to be able to make their own products work as intended. We've already had this fight over the course of development about why exactly we need to have bone translations and how it makes animating literally everything so much easier and better looking, especially for human avatars. I'd really rather not go back 5 steps just to go forward 1. The lack of sliders has never stopped creators for making unique and diverse content, and having limited sliders could only help people diversify their content more. There's a whole lot more people than just the market you're a part of, and it'd be unfair to shoot everyone else in the foot just because you want something a little more unique from what other people have in your little section of the grid.

As a quick update, I've got the Alpha HUD section covered now.

It'll be at least a month and a half before I'll be anywhere close to needing to commission these scripts from someone, but I figured I should go ahead and plan how much I should put aside before then. I understand that what I'm wanting to do with the scripts will probably raise the price a fair bit. For the applier system, I'm looking for a listener script to put in the body to recieve the UUID for replacing the texture, and a script to send the UUID to the listener script to be placed into an object. Features needed: Owner-only access, applier only "speaks" with the owner's objects, able to load UUID in from a menu, able to pick which layer the UUID affects (base, tattoo, marking/makeup, clothing). Copy/modify/transfer with commenting preferred so that I can modify what's affected, but I can live with copy/no modify/transfer. May be used in other avatars that I make, depending on how well what I'm planning goes over. Distribution: The applier will be part of a developer kit for the avatar I'm making, and the sender script will be distributed as copy/no modify/transfer. For the alpha HUD, I'm looking for a listener script to put in the body to tell the various faces to be alphaed out, and a script to be placed into a multi-button HUD that tells which face to alpha based on which button is pressed. Features needed: Owner-only access, HUD only "speaks" with the owner's objects. Copy/modify/transfer with commenting needed so that I can alter what's affected. May also be used in other avatars that I make, depending on how well what I'm planning goes over. Distribution: These scripts will not be distributed at all, and will be set to copy/no modify/no transfer for the consumer. As a note, the avatar I'm making will be sold on a side store account. I'd prefer quotes to be PMed to me on the forums.