Cyrule Adder

Well... there are tools to help you do that. But if you don't want to bash your brains out by attempting to wrangle a mixture of Alpha masking, and blending. What you can do is you can paint your hair cards in photoshop with a "softish" brush in the alpha channel. When I say "Softish" I mean there's a very clear dark zone, and soft fuzzy edges that spans out a good ways. When you run alpha masking, you will usually be asked about an "alpha-cutoff". A typical alpha texture runs from 0 transparency to 100. The cutoff selects from zero, all the way up to the point you've marked. But here's the magic. Due to the way the GPUs work, textures are sampled, and many times these values will get blended. What will happen is the alpha will be anti-aliased. Assisting in making it look cleaner.

Sorry this is a week later. But hopefully this provides a solution for later. No. It's not possible without being able to modify UVs. You can try creating a tattoo layer for the location of concern, but this completely negates the solution BoM is designed for. Additionally, a higher resolution will not fix the underlying issues caused by UVs. What you can do is load the body in a 3D software like Blender, Substance Painter, Armor paint, and paint your tattoo directly onto the mesh so it is accurate. This eill probably be your best bet. If this is one of the brand name models, like Maitriya, where you have to go through an unnecessary vetting process, you can use any Omega based body to get the job done. The system avatars work too

They don't just pop in occasionally like a normal consumer?

The shape is impossible to achieve with cloth alone. Even in real life. What was done in the example inage, was they imported a secondary mesh that has the bell shape, made invisible. When they do the draping, both the avatar and the bell shaped mesh will be active physics objects to shape the clothing.

This generally isn't ideal. Decimation can only get you so far, which is why you are experiencing a huge fluctuation. Your best bet is to use the geometry you built with prims as a guide line. And manually build the polygon mesh around them yourself. This will normally result in a much lower LI cost. Additionally, part of the LI cost reduction is in proper LODs, and physics mesh if required.

Solidify would not be the correct modifier. You'll want to use "Make Double Sided" And the reason why it's not reflected in Second Life, is you did not change the settings to help resolve the Z-fighting issues in SL. Additionally, SL's Alpha blending has well known to be kinda *****.

Adding onto what Chinrey said... a lot of times... you can get even lower Polygons with some really - really stupid tricks that most people don't actually think about. Alpha Masking is generally one of my favorite tricks. Because it allows me to make Railing, Cages, Archways, windows, round things, and what have you for a massive reduction in polygons. https://simonschreibt.de/gat/alpha1-top5/ With clothing. The way they do it is they sculpt the clothing and make it extremely highly detailed. They then make a lower poly version of the HD mesh, and bake out a normal map. One of my incomplete projects below as an example. That normal map, along with the color map is what gives it a very high detailed look. Sometimes you can get away with the colormap only. In fact, a lot of heavy lifting is done by textures. This is one of my mods that I did a year or two ago in about... 3 days. A Kobold using the Kemono body and some bodyparts. With the textures and horns made by me. The body is almost completely flat on the front. (using a flat chest mod). But a lot of effort went into painting the AO, and creating a servicable normal-map for a low density texture, which is the entire body standing up using very little of a 1024x1024... but the feet and hands eat up quite a bit of space. Alone this still does look fairly flat. But this can easily be improved by a tiling scaled specular and bump map which will give it omph. As you can see below in one of my more recent project characters.

This is a common problem. Unlike other geometry, anything set with Alpha Blending cannot benefit from the Zbuffer, which determines the rendering order of solid polygons, and to tell the render what to part of a mesh to skip. Instead what happens is your solid geometry is rendered first (Front to back). Then your alpha meshes are rendered from back to front as best as possible. The problem here is that it's not easy to figure out what is considered to be in front, or behind. This is because one mesh could be "in front" at multiple angles, with an object in between. So you get a Z-fighting issue. Which is where it looks like something is popping back and forth. Or something completely disappears. Alpha Blending is intended for things with significant transparency. Ultimately, the best fix is to use Alpha Masking, instead of Alpha blending. Alpha Masking will still make use of the Zbuffer, eliminating any of the Z-fighting issues. The difference here is that where you can have soft smoke with Alpha Blending, you cannot emulate this with alpha masking. Alpha Masking says it's either completely invisible, or it's completely solid at this pixel.

Vertex normals are automatically exported with Collada, as it is part of the mesh data. If you are seeing artifacts in the shading, then there's a couple of things that could be going horribly wrong. The first and most common is that you have an inverted normal. In which case you need to recalculate your normals. Enter Edit mode, Press A, then press Cntrl+N for Blender 2.8. You can also just search for this in the search menu. The second most common is that you have polygons that are not manifold. This means the geometry is considered to be mathmatically impossible. You have one or more vertexes of a polygon that are not planar. That is to say... if you lay a sheet of paper on a table. And you look at the four corners. They are all on the same surface, so they are planar. If you lift one or two corners, it is no longer planar. Finally, the third possible is that you just have *****ty topology. A pole (a vertex with 5 or more points) will create a strange pucker on a curved or moving surface. Three edges running parallel near each other will create a visibly sharp edge. Not always, it depends. But they do have their limits in what they can and cannot do. Normals will only effect the shading on the face. So you will get a very strange artifact when the lighting start's shifting more to one side. This is because it is the polygon's normals that's responsible for how lighting flows along the model. But this is also dependent on how the renderer works behind the scenes. So it could work as expected.

Take a look at some AAA games, they have done more with less. As I mentioned, the trick is mostly in the textures, and manipulating the normals of the vertex (and not just relying on texture normals). And you can fake volume of strands like this. It's a trick we often use in the game industry (though I work in simulations... we do the same thing). In the picture below, the vertex of each leaf has been edited in such a way that the lighting hits it as it would a sphere. Which allows it to visually look like it has far more volume than original. Hair is also not as complex as people makes it out. There are usually three lairs to most standard haircuts. The underlying lair that gives the primary volume. These are wide ribbons. Secondary shapes that helps breaks up the first and gives additional detail. The third is usually the detail lair. Additionally. For some tools, you can actually run an auto decimation on it. Which will do it's best to preserve the shape while reducing the overall polygonal count. There's even two freely avaliable. Blender, and Simplygon And, you're right. There isn't really a benefit to the creator. Which is why it'll be nice when the recomputation of LI comes along.

So If I am understanding this correctly. You can manipulate the joint positions (effectively changing the length of the bones), and still fit some standard clothing options as long as the Collision bones are rotated in a fashion relative to the parent bones that they maintain the same positioning? Like... if I stick my hand out, and called that 1. Then bed over 90 degrees and turned left twenty without moving my hand. It's still 1? If that's the case, I think Avastar does something like that. If not, I it's not terribly hard to script it, as it's mostly math at that point. And can the Collision bones be resized to match the body?

As Lucia stated... many of the developers do some complete BS with their creations, and tell users to simply bump up their graphical settings with almost no concideration to the massive performance impact that does under a typical render scene for a viewer. Then they will do things like use a single triangle at the lowest LOD setting to save money, and drop the LI. This is because the foolish concept of "More polygons means higher quality. Despite the texture density not changing. I am willing to bet that most of the developers hadn't even heard of optimization. Because when a high polygon model has triangles less than the size of a pixel, that causes some extreme performance issues. That being said, Land Impact isn't the measurement for avatar attachments. It's complexity. Which... the LL complexity calculations are very suspect. Ideally... hair shouldn't really be more than 2-4k triangles. And that is being extremely generous. To put this into perspective, typical Tripple A game made by a multi-million dollar company, with computer destroying graphics... usually only has about 25-30k triangles for the entire character. And hair, including dense body covering fur, beards, long voluminous hair, Afros, and what have you rarely ever exceed 1k triangles in total. So that should be the sweet spot. If you are planning on making hair. I suggest learning how to make hair cards. Then along with the normal texture, manipulate vertex normals to further adjust how the light will interact with it. This is how you can achieve sub 1k hair and still look better than most of the hair you will find on the marketplace.

I'm looking to creating a mesh avatar body. It's main intention is for use with Roleplay sims, as a more monsterous humanoid creature. If it gets used as a regular day to day avatar, so be it. So obviously it's not intended to compete with the name brand avatars. That being said, it'd be incredibly unlikely for it to get wide spread mod support unless it just soars with disproportionate popularity. My hopes is that the avatar would be able to fit some of the standard sizing clothing options, along with specifically tailored options. The proportions of the avatar would be roughly the same, but it's intended max height would be 4.6ft and below (1.53333), as it is a goblinoid creature (Skaven, Kobold (DnD modern and Dogbold equivalent), Goblin, . So most likely those clothing options would be XXS,XS,S. There is a few reasons why I don't try making a mod kit. This is mostly because shrinking down the average size avatars does not produce a proportional effect, unless and I guess... you design with the intent for them to be that small. The bodies that can reach those proportions in an aesthetically pleasing way, are typically universally banned on roleplaying sims (the intended target). Anyone know a good way to approach this, or should I just drop trying to be compatible with clothing options? My initial thought was to open avastar and match the settings. Then try to shrink the avatar down as much as possible and see what the changes in proportions would look like. And try to keep the joint positions for major areas like shoulders, chest, arms, and waist. Try to make some changes that will allow it to continue to fit certain parts. Then Faff about with a dummy on the beta-grid to see if I can get something servicable. But if I can save weeks of tinkering, instead of making, that would be good.

I was sending money back to my paypal account, when I typed in the email confirmation twice. Both times I missed the last letter in gmail. I was wondering if it was possible for me to cancel the transaction and get the money back, or if I can't will it automaticaly come back to me?