[Blender Assign Texture to multiple materials at once?]

I am creating a mesh body in Blender for upload to SL. I have divided the mesh into multiple objects, each object with multiple materials/faces, to allow for multiple alpha cuts on the resulting mesh body.

When I had the mesh as all one piece, I assigned a texture to it. As I assign the multiple materials/faces to each object it loses the texture assignment the original object had.
For each material (8 per object) on each object (about 18 objects so far), I currently:
1. On the Material panel->Surface tab, Change "Color" to "Image Texture".
2. Select the texture from the list available (or open for a new texture).
...in order to get the texture to show up on that new material on an object that already had the texture showing on the whole object.

Is there a shortcut way to select multiple materials, or the whole object, and assign the texture to all the materials on the object? Or a way to create the new materials that inherit the current texture settings?

I am using Blender Version 2.79b 2018-03-22 on a Mac.

[UV mapping a character model to SLUV]

Thanks @Kyrah Abattoir, That makes sense.

So, while this procedure, suggested by @SarahBeil, won't create a perfect duplicate of UV mapping compared to an original LL avatar UV map, it would at least be a good start, (compared to blenders almost random UV assignment), to be tested and adjusted until one is happy with the way a texture shows up on the new mesh.

[UV mapping a character model to SLUV]

3 minutes ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

The LL avatar being the reference geometry whose UVs you are trying to match, smoothing it will essentially make your reference 'drift' from its original configuration. Yes it's smoother but its geometry is now an incorrect reference point.

So, are saying that the UVs that are being copied from the 'subsurf'ed LL avatar will not be accurate as the UVs on the original LL avatar?

[UV mapping a character model to SLUV]

On 1/9/2019 at 6:20 PM, Kyrah Abattoir said:

The subsurf will smooth/deform the original tho so you won't be as accurate.

 

On 1/9/2019 at 11:24 PM, Kyrah Abattoir said:

I wasn't talking about the UVs.

What won't be as accurate if you don't mean the UV? Isn't the original post only about copying the SL UVs?
 

[Mesh Body Onion Layers RFC?]

3 hours ago, Klytyna said:

Avoid appliers... Unless you want to use Materials for normal/specular mapping, because BakeFail is failed tech that does not support Materials...

Agreed. Fortunately they have said it is likely to be implemented in phase 2.

3 hours ago, Klytyna said:

Avoid onions... Unless you want to wear applied clothing that doesn't look like flat matte body paint from 2008...

Using a multi-layers mesh body, i.e. onions, for clothing will still look like the clothing that was painted on.  Most only use it for clothing intended to be close to the body, like lingerie, leggings, tight fitting Ts and tanks, and other very tight fitting clothes. BoM is intended to alleviate the need for a multi-layered body, not the need for full mesh clothing like a coat or dress or loose fitting sweatshirt. True, adding a coat or sweatshirt could technically be considered layering, but it's more like layering clothes in the real world and less like an onions' layers.

4 hours ago, Klytyna said:

Avoid Full Perm... This is my real favorite in the BakeFail lies list...

This statement is about release to the end user, not developers creating content for other developers/retailers. The end user doesn't have to do any of those things you mentioned about full perm.

4 hours ago, Klytyna said:

In addition, when that worthless crap was written and posted, BakeFail only did the 6 standard system avatar bakes, so, it was no bloody use for texturing worn mesh clothing as the uv template of the dress in no way matches the uv template of your mesh body under it so that using BakeFail on body and clothing would result in half the dress texture being displayed sideways on those parts of your body not covered by the dress...

1) BoM has nothing to do with the UV template; it only bakes textures and sends it as is to the mesh, which then uses that texture with it's own UV template.

2) It is not intended to be used for mesh clothing other than skin tight fitting clothes. Yes, it could be used for a big fancy dress, but that is not the intent. The number of avatar bakes is appropriate for replacing mesh body onion layers.

 

Using your assumption that BoM is intended to replace texturing for anything and everything that is attached to an avatar, you are right, it failed. Using the assumption that it's primary use case is to replace multi layered onion skin mesh bodies, most of your critiques don't really apply. The one critique I think you are right on is Materials; there are some skins that take full advantage of Materials. Fortunately, that should be resolved soon.

~Sean

[Mesh Body Onion Layers RFC?]

1 hour ago, ellestones said:

with the recent kerfuffle over UV maps for Catwa (potential copyright issues due to derivative works) then it kinda makes sense to me for Omega (being a commercial enterprise) at this time to avoid potentially similar issues with Ruth 2.0 and its derivatives. Ruth 2.0 assets being AGPL licensed

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ruth is pure LL/SL UV maps, which is what is *required* for Omega. Also, if you *add* something to go along with Ruth, but not derived from Ruth, then the AGPL does not apply to it; that's why I can include EE skins and clothes made by others without worrying about AGPL.

 

1 hour ago, ellestones said:

also given that Ruth 2.0 is typically distributed with modify perms, then from a commercial applier maker's pov it doesn't make a lot of sense to expend resources on creating a nice to have applier capability for what is essentially a freebie body

I thought some mesh bodies had to be modify to allow the end user to insert the Omega script? In any case, permissions can be modified for use with Omega at their request. The Ruth 2.0 team even made an exception for permissions because of skin/clothing appliers just like Omega. Omega has also worked with mesh body appliers instead of directly with the body, which could easily be done with Ruth Too to for sure avoid any issues with AGPL.

Agreed about Ruth being freebie, but I would assume her cut is going to be the same either way. And someone who gets a freebie body will have more L$s to spend on clothes. Why would she pass up more income? Also, I would have to pay her for any scripting she has to do to support an Omega for Ruth. Just because Ruth is free doesn't mean she gets less L$s.

I'm not expecting you to know her actual reasons; I realize that you are just giving your idea of why she might not want to work with Ruth, (and I also realize you may very well be correct about her reasons). What confuses me is why she won't tell anyone her actual reasons.

The whole purpose of creating Ruth is to provide a low poly, decent quality, freely available, and usable mesh body. If the creators knew the issue that prevents Omega from working with Ruth, then they might have used, (or now change to), a different copyright that is more compatible with SL/OS clothing industries like Omega. There is no point in creating a brand new mesh body if nobody wants to use it because they can't get clothing for it. The Ruth creators knew that.

And, I do plan on creating what I can for mesh clothing/mesh bases for Ruth Too, but I'm not very efficient or quick with Blender. It won't happen overnight.

~Sean
 

[Mesh Body Onion Layers RFC?]

20 hours ago, Callum Meriman said:

It would make sense to do an Omega for the body.

Chellynne Bailey got back to me on Omega today. She will not support any mesh body derived from Ruth 2.0, which mine is. She says she cannot disclose her reasons. I guess I'm waiting for BoM for sure now.
~Sean

[Mesh Body Onion Layers RFC?]

9 minutes ago, ellestones said:

any new body introduced at this time that is the same as the products currently on the market, same meaning onion-skinned, is not going to excite me into wanting it.

Ruth is not intended for people who have already spent big L$s on fancy mesh bodies like Maitreya. To start with, Ruth is free. So, it is primarily intended as a decent mesh body for people not wanting to spent 1000's of L$s on a commercial mesh body. Ruth is also fairly simpler than the fancy mesh bodies, having a reasonably low Avatar Complexity.

14 minutes ago, ellestones said:

what I would like is for BOM-targeted bodies to be released with Copy-Modify permissions.

Ruth Too RC3 is already copy/mod. You could even download Ruth Blender files and/or the DAE files for uploading to your own account to do what you want with, (on SL or OpenSim).

15 minutes ago, ellestones said:

i am not one of those people. I personally will not bother with any BOM body from any maker that is No-Modify. I want to be able to buy the textures and edit-add apply them myself. Same as I can now with any other texture on any other inworld object

You can do this now with the free Ruth Too RC3.

My questions primarily had to do with making Ruth Too RC3 more compatible with what is out there now. But all I seem to be getting in response is don't do it, wait for BoM. I haven't done it yet; my Ruth Too RC3 is currently only available, (for free), with a single layer mesh body, a skin applier HUD and alpha cut HUD, all open source copy/mod including the scripts. (Even some mesh clothes available for existing other mesh bodies fit Ruth fairly well.)

~Sean
 

[Mesh Body Onion Layers RFC?]

44 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

Not possible as Omega won't work on transferable bodies (I guess to protect skin designers's intelectual property). You can however try to make it BoM (Bakes on Mesh) compatible  so when BoM finally arrives it could just apply old system skins onto Ruth. Lots of designers will start releasing BoM compatible skins (basically 1024 system skins without painted on nails) once it exits betatesting and hits the main grid. In fact I was already considering doing a BoM applier for Ruth 2.0 myself as that would greatly improve her usefullness to starters once there is a BoM capable Linux viewer.

My Ruth Too RC3 is not transferable; so it could be Omega compatible. (You can get DAE's to upload and do what you want, but then it wouldn't be *my* Ruth.) I am already getting requests for the Omega skin applier, and I only released my Ruth Too RC3 2 weeks ago, (Nov. 28, 2018). Maybe I'll just do a skin only Omega applier that only uses the one layer.

I am planning to create a BoM applier for my Ruth Too RC3, but from what I've been reading on the BoM forum, I'm not confident it will be available anytime soon.
(I realize "soon" is a relative term; so, I'm thinking it won't be available for a few months. I've written code and of course debugged it; so I don't have confidence that the bug mentioned below will be an easy fix or the last bug found.)
https://community.secondlife.com/forums/topic/430696-any-updates-on-bom/?tab=comments#comment-1829762
I suppose it wouldn't hurt to start on the BoM applier now since I have yet to hear back from Omega about my request.

~Sean
 

 

[Mesh Body Onion Layers RFC?]

I have recently released a very basic, single layer, open source, female mesh body, (Ruth Too RC3), with a basic skin applier HUD and alpha-cut HUD. (Available on the MarketPlace for free.)

I am looking at making it Omega capable for access to a lot more clothes. Since BoM appears to still be quite a ways off, I'm assuming I will need to create onion layers for the mesh body to accommodate skin, tatt, undies and clothes. Is there a more or less standard or recommended way of doing layers? I have seen at least one mesh body have all the layers combined as one attachment, but I am considering creating separate attachments for each layer to avoid unnecessary complexity if you don't need a tatt layer and/or underwear layer, (just don't attach it).

I am also looking for recommendations as to the best way to create appliers to be most compatible with clothing makers/skin makers/Omega/etc. (Perhaps another forum focusing on LSL might be better for this?) I am pretty capable at LSL. So, I should be able to implement a decent applier interface, but I have no clue how most creators do their appliers for mesh bodies. The skin applier I have for Ruth is open source, uses UUIDs and a Config notecard. Since this is completely open, it obviously won't work for commercial skins, but it shows how I implemented it for Ruth. Any recommendations for implementing a creator friendly applier interface would be appreciated.

~Sean

 

[Skin Weight and Subset Material issues]

You really should try Avastar to rig and weight clothing for SL. It is possible to do it with Blender alone, but a real PITA.

https://blog.machinimatrix.org/avastar/

~Sean

 

[Multiple faces causing shadows in world]

9 minutes ago, Beq Janus said:

Judging by the ridges on the mesh my first guess would be that you have either not got smooth shading set up in Blender (or have hard edges or some similar setting) and/or are recalculating the normals when you are importing.

I tried re-uploading to the Beta grid without recalculating normals, and that fixed it!! Yay!
Thank you Beq Janus!!!

~Sean Heavy

[Multiple faces causing shadows in world]

3 hours ago, Whirly Fizzle said:

Does it look like this?  BUG-225559 - shadows have odd bands (shadow acne) around the edges when you zoom in

No, it looks like this. This is a side view of a leg at about the knee. This is with a single normal Eloh Eliot skin applied to the Mesh Lower Body. I have seen other bodies that I know are cut up and have materials, but they don't do this; only my uploads seem to be doing it. None of these lines show up if the mesh is one big piece and no materials/faces.
~Sean Heavy
 

[Multiple faces causing shadows in world]

I have a mesh body that I am trying to cut up and assign materials using Blender 2.79 (primarily for using alphas under clothing). I am using Separate by selection to create smaller mesh pieces. I am assigning materials by selection. Each mesh piece has no more than 8 materials/faces. I have not done any resizing or modifications to any new piece created.

When I upload the entire mesh body, i.e. all the pieces together as one DAE, I can see shadows at the edges of each material/face (in SL Beta grid) even after assigning a skin texture. Seeing horizontal and vertical lines on a thigh or a knee just doesn't look right.

I am using Avastar 2.4 to export the DAE from Blender. I am using the latest official release of Firestorm to upload the DAE. I have also tried the standard SL viewer to upload.

Are there settings that I am missing either when creating the pieces, creating the DAE, or uploading to SL? Are there settings in Firestorm that affect whether I see those shadows or not?

~Sean Heavy

 

[This is why we can't have nice things.]

I love this thread. Thank you for entertaining an old fart who wrote programs on punch cards for an IBM Mainframe in the late '70s.
Our graphics claim to fame was ASCII art printed on an old, (at the time even), IBM 1403 line printer.
~Sean

 

[Blender 2.79 Collada Export for SecondLife Failing]

Thank you very much @Gaia Clary!!

I had been reading your Fitted Mesh Kit page, but I never made the connection to the "Keep Bind Info" needing to be enabled for Collada exporting. I just tried the export/import again with the proper settings, and it is working great. I would like to suggest adding your statements below to the Fitted Mesh Kit page for those like me who just don't seem to make the connection:

37 minutes ago, Gaia Clary said:

So the generalized situation in Blender 2.79 is like this:

• For importing meshes we now store the Bind information when the new import option "keep bind info" is enabled.
• Consequently for exporting meshes the bind information is now only exported when the new option "keep bind info" is enabled.

However the new export option "keep bind info" is not part of the exporter presets and needs to be enabled manually. But you can create your own export presets (that is what i did for myself)

@Gaia Clary, Thank you for all the work you do on the Blender to SecondLife transitions. I am hoping to soon purchase your Avastar tools when I have the extra cash, if anything to encourage you to keep up the good work. Thanks again!

~Sean Heavy

[Blender 2.79 Collada Export for SecondLife Failing]

Thank you @Beq Janus,

That is exactly the problem I am having. Sometimes the "alien" look changes here and there, but it is obviously not correct. I had read recently that @Gaia Clary is very involved in the Blender Collada export, even though she sells software, (Avastar), for doing just that. I appreciate her involvement!

~Sean Heavy

 

[Blender 2.79 Collada Export for SecondLife Failing]

Macro,

On a Mac, there is no 'install' to bork. You just unzip it, move it to the Applications folder and run the program. Also, the latest release is the one having the problem. I went back to a previous release to not have the bug.

I have heard in private that others are having similar, if not the same, issues with the latest release of Blender. I was hoping to reach more people in the forums.

~Sean Heavy

[Blender 2.79 Collada Export for SecondLife Failing]

Hi Beq Janus,

I just realized, I too am using 2.79b, (I left off the b in my post.)

I am using the built-in Blender collada export tool. I am using the default "Sl + Open Sim Rigged" settings, which work fine in the other Blender versions I tested.  I am not using Avastar, and, yes, rigged meshes for SL avatar bodies. For now, I have just started using 2.78c since it works fine, but I would like to find out what is happening with 2.79b.

Here are some screenshots of my settings for export from Blender and Import to SL. Note the deformed body on the SL import. BTW, the deform only happens when you 'skin'/wear it; if you just set it on the ground for editing, it looks fine.

~Sean Heavy

Editing, This was the wrong screenshot for the collada export. Here is the correct one that I am using.

 

[Blender 2.79 Collada Export for SecondLife Failing]

I have tested the Blender Collada export for SL avatar mesh using the fitted_mesh-270.blend Blender file downloaded from here:
https://blog.machinimatrix.org/fitted_mesh_survival_kit/

Earlier Blender versions, (2.72, 2.75a, 2.76b, 2.77, 2.78c), are working fine for exporting your Blender mesh as an SL Avatar Mesh. The latest, 2.79, does not work for exporting your Blender mesh as an SL Avatar Mesh. (Using a Mac; I dunno about the PC version, but I assume it is the same.) The problem is the resulting avatar looks completely deformed. Is anyone else having this problem? Am I the only one experiencing this issue? Should I report it as a bug to Blender? My tests on all those versions had essentially identical settings in the Collada export tool.

I have also tried a number of other meshes, also exhibiting the same problems.

~Sean Heavy