Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About WingalingDragon

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think we'd all be better off here if we didn't assume what others were implying That's caused plenty of argument so far, and is the cause behind a bunch of the posts that many are finding to be repeated sides of overdone arguments. Those menus are nice for sure, and thankfully common, but adjusting poses is only one of the many reasons no-mod furniture is problematic. Biggest example for me that I don't think too many know about: In my home plot we use a scene rezzer to switch between multiple scenes without needing to replace everything every time we want to go back to a previous one(suuuuper handy!). Using this is basically mandatory because we don't own an entire sim or even close, so this is the only way we can keep creating within our prim/size limits without essentially deleting our previous creations. The thing is, you need to put a script inside an object in order for the rezzer to be able to pick it up and replace it where it needs to be, and you can't do that with a no-mod furniture item. Overall, the purpose of this topic was fulfilled, at least a bit, so thank you guys I learned a few understandable and reasonable causes for no-mod items, and I learned that others are so set in their no-mod ways that they actually get insulted when someone asks about it, yikes! Hopefully the many people here who have put the thought out there that they are much more likely to buy modify items(as well as listing some good examples of why it's important) is enough to encourage some sellers at least, as the base concept of making your product desirable to more people is rather simple, especially when it doesn't actually require extra effort to widen your audience. Those sellers who view their creations as art that should not be modified and should be displayed as they personally wanted it to be, respectfully I think you may be in the wrong place for that(as far as profit is concerned). Apart from rare occasions, generally artists who only pursue their own visions and do not do any form of commissioned work are not making lots of money doing so. There's nothing wrong with that, don't get me wrong, but you have to understand that the artist who is willing to create for the masses instead of themselves is simply going to have a significantly larger potential to profit. I'm not saying that's selfish either to create for yourself, I know I couldn't put that much time and effort into something that I wasn't personally interested in, but some can, and since they can reach a much wider range of tastes, they're going to have more potential customers. The same goes for no-mod. Sorry to those who think this thread is just a re-hash! I'm glad it got some attention and thought though, and even more glad that there are some informative and reasonable posts here to explain a bit on each side of the issue. Thanks to everyone who provided those, and thanks as well to everyone who didn't come in here with hostility, no matter what you posted
  2. Thanks for the reply It needs to be there unfortunately, as it's a big chunk of tree leaves that have been made transparent to have just the branch showing. They're just a separate face of the tree(can't unlink them) , so this was the best we could figure out for now. I know some objects have this property where they're impossible to right click or center the camera on, but I'm not sure if that only applies to rigged attachments or not.
  3. I'm definitely no expert, but from my limited experience(using pngs at least), switching to alpha masking and playing with the 'mask cutoff' value might fix that for ya. You may have to use select face for the option to come up if there are alpha and non-alpha textures on the same object, but that may be best for what you're going for anyway since the mask cutoff might have different optimal values per section.
  4. Hi! Does anyone know how to modify an object so it's treated as if it's not there? For example, those dreaded tree leaves that capture your camera pans and right click attempts to move things nearby. I gave them 100% transparency, but they still block a massive area from being used properly -flails-
  5. It's on our own land, but the item is called JIAN Koi Pond Gazebo. Here's a link to the store page if that helps: https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/JIAN-Koi-Pond-Gazebo/13272016 The items producing light were just ones we added light to via the features tab, and making a box with that also worked the same strange way. As a side note, in case it matters, I went and disabled the other lights but it was still being wonky after that x.x Edit: So at some point later, a few of the lights started working properly, so maybe disabling the others had some kind of delayed effect somehow? Edit 2: Aaaand they stopped again XD
  6. Thanks for the reply!! There are more than 6 sources, but i have advanced lighting model ticked on.
  7. Maybe they fall under the creators that promote mods, and I am definitely forgetting some unfortunately, but here's some Krankhaus(who also has amazing prices), ASR, M.O.R., Utilizator, Wretch, Glutz, Luca's Mesh Foundry(also good prices!) Some of those may not give them for every item, and some might require an external download on a provided link as well. Hopefully that helps though!
  8. Hiya, I ran into an odd problem today when setting up an area, where the lighting would reflect beautifully off a water surface(non linden water), but only when the object producing the light was selected via right click or the edit menu. After messing around with it, it seems to work the same on other surfaces too besides the water, and it even worked this way when creating a box and using lighting from that. I've messed with all sorts of overall lighting/graphic settings in preferences, as well as trying changing windlights, and messing with the lighting's numerical settings, but i can only prevent it from happening at all, not make it function the way it does when it's selected. These objects work like this on another computer/account, so I ended up ruling out it being some local setting(unless we had the same setting on incorrectly). Any idea what could be causing this or how to prevent it?
  9. Your wanting me to say something is different from me actually saying it You're relentlessly insulting me, putting words in my mouth, and denying words you yourself said. Obviously a reasonable discussion is not going to happen with you, and if you keep acting this way you're only going to encourage people to not buy your stuff in case they have to actually talk to you. I didn't say any of that work was easy, and I didn't mention any specific product or price. I'm mostly inclined to just ignore you at this point though unless you start becoming reasonable, sorry. Many implies a large number, not a large percentage. There are plenty of full perm things for sale, but they are also uncommon. Same goes for those who include textures. It doesn't need to be the majority to still be a decent sized number First off, twisting people's desire to create their own unique look or make things specific to how they want for their own personal use into "desire to ruin your work" is a bit overkill, don't you think?(On top of being a little insulting to the end user's creative skills, people can mod things well too, you know :P) Secondly, if this was true, wouldn't every merchant who sells modify items be out of business by now? This is not as much of a problem as people think, or as people lead others to think, or nearly everyone would have settled into selling no-mod after all this time. I never said I own the texture, I said I paid the price you asked for the work required to make the texture. If I'm not reselling the item, and I'm not drawing overtop your actual texture(even if I was... what is so wrong with *that*?), is it really so bad to let someone look at an unsaveable guideline on how to attempt their own? Also, why do you have the tone that customers wanting some freedom with their personally owned virtual object is offensive to you? Acting like we're entitled to want to be able to modify an object in a platform that's entire focus is creativity is not really helpful to anything. And once again, the concept of wanting to create your own unique or specific thing and finding that some item can fit that if it's modifiable is an entirely different thing than wanting to "ruin your work". Unless you only sell items to trolls and griefers, your customers are generally never even concerned with ruining your work. They want something to work for the idea they're trying to put together. It was made clear repeatedly, in both my literal words and in the following explanations that were posted, i only intended the word shady to be applied to selling color packs for the same price and ticking no mod so buying those packs is the only way to change colors. Continuing to act as if I meant what you hoped I meant is not going to progress any discussion, get any logical point across, or clear any concepts up. Very this Thanks for being a voice of reason here, though it seems we're being ganged up on a bit and not all of those people are actually listening to what we're saying unfortunately. If the things were true that the more offended of merchants are claiming, the marketplace would be a very different place and there wouldn't be any successful sellers that allow modify. But, I'm afraid that continuing the discussion is just going to end up in this circle of us trying to clear up the idea, and a few others repeatedly telling us why they're angry at a misunderstanding they refuse to acknowledge... 🤥 If at least one random seller got the point and realized that allowing others to modify is not going to ruin their business, that's probably good enough, cause I don't think we can convince the ones who seem more focused on arguing or insulting than discussing. -salutes-
  10. Once again, I didn't say every no mod seller is shady, nor did I imply it without heavy stretching and taking some serious liberties with what I *could have* meant. It is, however, my personal opinion that disabling modify and charging the same price as your entire package of work for only a fraction of that work, solely because it is now the only way to get a new color on that item, is a shady practice. I agree with most of this, but if someone is making the mistake of thinking that an item they see is 100% the same as it was sold, that's their mistake. Going around and looking at avatars, it should be apparent before long that people modify their own items very commonly, especially if you ask someone where they got something. As far as perms visible, that does seem to be a growing issue. And sadly, those items have been no modify pretty often, and it's also sadly too common for the sellers to just ignore attempts to communicate with them. It does at least make it especially refreshing when you run into a friendly, responsive creator though, and they are out there Edit: As a side note, disabling modify to prevent someone from looking at the general layout of a texture because it "protects their work" seems to be a bit of a stretch to me. They can't see the fine details, they can't copy or download it, and at best it can give them a guideline if they decide to attempt their own texture. In addition, we bought the texture, is it so bad to have a thumbnail and a scaled down image of it? Many creators give full perm versions of their included textures and don't charge extra for them. Which is awesome And also doesn't seem to be destroying their business at all.
  11. You honestly think you'd lose more sales from people believing adding your own textures isn't a thing than you would gain from people who prefer modify items? That seems a bit much, especially since you can often tell when a texture isn't specifically made for an item, or when tinting washes out the detail too much. I'm sure it happens, but it would seem strange to me if the number of people that made judgements like that was high. Between people I know, the texture is often irrelevant because they're looking at the object itself and considering how to make use of it in a variety of ways. Sometimes both is nice. Using it as intended once, and messing with it to make it seem different for another avatar. I'm poor, reusing stuff is nice Since it doesn't take any extra work from the creator who's been paid already, I don't see why it's considered unfair for someone to put some work of their own in on an item so they can extend it's usability. There are good and bad ways of doing that. For example, It's okay to maximize profits in ways that just get the word out on your product, or give more reasons for people to want to buy said product. Ways to maximize profit that end up hurting customers or alienating them, like designing products that statistically fail not long after their warranty expires, not so good In the case of charging full cost for extra colors, many creators are charging us a fee for all their work with say 6 similar colors in a pack. If the price of that pack is 400L, we're paying 400 L for the model, rigging, texturing, and bump/spec work. However, when it comes to re-buying the next pack of colors, we're essentially asked to pay for the same model, rigging, and usually bump/spec maps. It's bad to tell the customer if they want a different color, they have to rebuy the entire package rather than having more appropriately priced texture packs out there. Why not sell the item with a base texture, then sell "HQ texture packs" on the side? That will show them that sure you can tint, but you won't be getting as high a quality look from doing so, and it also won't make anyone feel like they got a bad deal having to pay for things they already have. As far as selling things on SL goes, I would imagine especially with the rather pricey rent costs, only the absolute most popular sellers make a significant profit, and even then it's likely not that much since many of those sellers charge huge amounts for their items, which would naturally lead to purchases being more rare.
  12. Thanks! Knowing this has been argued about before at least helps explain all the instant anger a bit. It's appreciated as well that you pointed out that I'm not doing things that it seems others have done regarding the subject before If there's a good reason for it to be there other than trying to artificially boost sales, I have nothing against it. It seemed more important to me to try and figure out what it is people think they're gaining by making things no mod, which has been at least talked about a little so far, since I didn't imagine everyone doing it just to force a rebuy for tinting.
  13. I said it's shady if the only reason you're clicking 'no-mod' is to sell tints. The only real reasonable way to be insulted by that is if you're specifically doing so, and in that case, I'm sorry but that seems shady to me since tinting is a normal thing on SL. If someone wants a high quality textured color, they'll still buy the other one because like it was mentioned, tinting doesn't produce the same result. If someone wants to tint or try to make their own texture, why does that bother you so much? If someone buys something, they're generally free to use it however they like. You did work, you set a price to it, and they paid you for it. Saying it's unfair for that person to tint their item because they should pay you the entire cost again for the same exact modeling, UV, rigging, etc, when all that's changing is a color is more than a bit unreasonable sounding. I asked for reasons why my assumption was wrong, which you haven't provided. Doing the standard political move of discrediting the person you can't pose a logical argument against isn't really a good way to inform people or give them the impression you're a friendly seller to deal with. That matters too quite a bit. The point of creating is to make things that people want to buy. As some of the people here have shared, there are a fair amount of us who avoid no mod purchases, with many of us willing to pay a little more to be able to use the item in any non-profit way we want. Small tweaks could be anything, really. Maybe a part needs to be removed so you just create a less properly fitting texture because having a better texture is not as important to you as putting an alpha chunk on the area you don't want to be there. Maybe someone wants to add their own bumpmap to change what sort of materials it appears as. I never said these things are going to look as good or better as your original creation, but that's up to us to decide if the tweak is more important if that's the case, and believe it or not, someone, somewhere out there is actually better at texturing than you, and maybe they actually can make a better texture, but don't know how to model and would gladly pay you for your work in doing so. By saying clever way, I was referring to the many possible tweaks the SL system allows us if the item is simply modify, like I mentioned above. Many neat things can be done with textures, alphas, bump or spec maps, and I'm sure there's plenty more cool tricks I have yet to discover. If I was talking about ripping content illegally, why would I even care if it's mod? The extra income comes from the range of people who would buy your product if they didn't have to specifically use it exactly how you intended or not at all. It doesn't take drugs to realize that allowing more use to your product will create more interested customers. I didn't say you'd suddenly make a fortune, I said you'd sell more, which you would. Insinuating that disabling modify stops people from pestering you seems like a bit of a stretch. I would guess that people will always contact sellers for a slew of reasons. Removing one of those reasons just adds another, in this case when someone 'complains' to you that they'd like a modify version of an item. Right here: Sheesh The history stuff is interesting but much of that, as you said, isn't really a thing anymore. If it's old items or something like that, then so be it. If you can afford high priced fatpacks for each article of clothing to get well done textures for each color, more power to you! Unfortunately, we all don't have a massive budget on here, and when your budget is limited, you start wondering why you're paying for every portion of that creators work all over again when you are really only buying some new textures. I did not say every merchant who sells a no mod item is shady. I'm not sure where you or the other guy got that idea. What I did say was, clicking no mod for no reason other than to force people to rebuy the whole item to get new colors is shady, and I stand by that. What successful company cares what you do with an item after you've bought it if you're not attaching their name to some kind of hate speech or terrible act? Does anyone really think it makes Nike as a company look bad if someone buys a pair of their shoes and draws in crayon all over them?
  14. I'm not demanding anything, I'm asking questions I'm not sure why you think it's a better idea to try and vilify me in some strange way instead of simply explain to me what the benefit of no-mod is, or the terrible downside to allowing it, but it's not helping your cause to attack people that ask questions. It makes it look like you really don't want this topic to be discussed in the first place, whatever your intentions are.
  15. If given a choice between buying a well made product that disables base functions in order to charge extra for them, and a well made product that allows you to tweak it for your own use, you'd pick eitehr or 50% of the time? I asked why people support no-mod sellers, and asked if there was any other reason than profit to disable modify. Who does it hurt for someone to allow me to tint an item to be a slightly darker shade to match the rest of a room/outfit/etc? It's odd people are saying 'make it yourself' without listing what is so bad about allowing modifications. If it's really such a bad thing, shouldn't it be easy to give reasons *why*?
  • Create New...