Phil Deakins

There is that, of course, but it's not an actual need to match SL sizes with RL sizes. I.e. to create rooms and furniture to RL sizes. It's easy enough to decide the SL size of something, in meters, and then create it in another programme, so there's no need at all to replicate actual RL sizes in SL.

The dimesnions of a standard 512 parcel are 16m x 32m. Therefore, the dimensions of 3 x 512s (1536), side by side are 32m x 48m, and a 30x30 house will fit ok. It's only if the three 512s in the 1536 are not side by side that you'd have to work out its dimensions, but two side by side 512s (1024 parcel) are 32x32m so the house would still fit.

I never meet any forum users inworld unless it's actually arranged, and nothing has been arranged for years. I may be mistaken,. but I think the last arranged meeting was with that girl who was gathering names of sims where bots were - that incredibly funny thread from RA times. I did meet Qie once, when he posted that he'd broken the mainland, and I had to have a look. I'd be very happy to meet some of you but it never happens.

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Pussycat Catnap wrote: Amethyst Jetaime wrote: I also have a long torso, and my legs are also quite a bit longer than your perfect proportions suggest they should be. To say this came about due only to " a birth defect or tragic accident or malnutrition" is absurd. A long torso is common enough that they even make bathing suits to fit them widely available. My long legs run in the genes of my family. I have a niece that has much more proportionally longer legs than I and no one calls her a freak; quite the contrary, most people find her gorgeous. You just defeated your own point. You have a long torso and long legs. Take a tape measure to yourself. Where is your midpoint? Actually no. The distance from my feet to the 'perfect' proportion midpoint is longer than from the top of my head to the same point. A long torso only means that my torso is longer than average for the size that I wear. I'm not getting into the human proportions discussion except that I have to agree with you on your point. Yesterday, I was watching TV with a friend when a young woman came on who had a surpisingly long lower torso (between her waist and her 'beam') compared to the rest of her body. It was so out of the ordinary that we both noticed it. If that shape was replicated in SL, it would be seen as being 'wrong' and as needing adjustment.

@Coby. I'm back. You are probably right - we should agree to differ - but it won't stop me from posting my views on the subject though And to reiterate my views on the subject... (1) Other than personal choice, there is no need whatsoever for SL sizes to match RL sizes. This is because RL and SL are two completely different worlds, and sizes have evolved in each of them according the the conditions in each of them. In the SL world, the camera is the cause of the way that sizes evolved, and the resulting sizes suit the SL world. (2) If the SL meter is assumed to be not the same as the RL meter, then the idea of matching SL sizes to actual RL sizes doesn't come up. If an apparent match is wanted, it's only necessary to create so that things look the same. Both of those completely do away with the very idea of SL sizes matching RL sizes.

Jo Yardley wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: The Berlin sim was mentioned a number of times and I went there during the old thread, but all I found were large spaces - no typical RL-sized rooms. I think that was because I had to be in a group or renting or something. Even so, I have yet to see a typical RL-sized room that works acceptably well within the SL world. I'm thinking of a furnished 12' x 12' x 8' room. Did you visit the right Berlin? And here is another room, I made it for a public display at the SL's birthday exhibit, so the ceiling is a little higher to allow people in. But scale wise, it is smaller then my livingroom in RL. Yes I visited the right Berlin. In fact I talked about the train and stuff there The picture you posted does look like a typical RL sized living room, which I assume it is, and it makes my point for me; i.e. navigating around the furniture inside that room, with the conditions in the SL world, would be very awkward compared to navigating around a furnished room that is created according to the SL conditions. The camera can be set wherever you like, and moving can be done with whatever method you choose, but navigating in that room will always be much worse than navigating in room that's been creating according to the conditions in the SL world.

Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: But it's not very good to correlate units in 2 different worlds when nothing of the 2 worlds ever meet. The reason why it would have been better to invent a unit for SL is because it would have avoided the frequent RL size / SL size discussions and arguments. (1) But they do meet. We have humans in RL, we have human avatars in SL. And other stuff too what we see in RL, they are in SL too. (2) I don't get the idea why virtual world would need some arbitrary measuring system having no correlation to anything at all. 1. No they don't meet. Nothing from the RL world ever gets into the SL world or vice versa. There are humans in RL but there are only avatars in SL - no humans. 2. Because it is a totally different world and the two never meet. So there is no reason at all to equate the measurements in the two worlds. Blue Mars uses meters, Cloud Party uses meters, Second Life uses meters. Lots of other virtual worlds, games and simulators use meters as a unit for content creation and measurement. Why is that? Has it been done so out of 'better knowledge' how virtual worlds work? Or would there indeed be a good reason to do so, to select an existing widely used familiar measurement unit? I think there is very good reason. I don't know any of those games but that doesn't matter. It doesn't matter what othe 3D environments use for measurement. The only thing that matters here is what SL uses. Let's imagine that in Second Life the length unit would be [blurp]. Let's say that a region would be 350 x 350 blurps in size. Now what would the default avatar height possibly be suitable for this world? 1 blurp, 2 blurps, 2.5 blurps, 3 blurps, perhaps 10 blurps or what? We would have no reference anywhere how to relate the avatar size to the region size. Thus no idea at all what that suitable avatar height would be. Linden Lab would have had to invent some height. First, the sim size would be decided upon. Then, if they next did the avatar, its size would be decided on in relation to the sim, together with the camera position. After that, everything falls into place. Perfect Let's say that they, after some heated discussions in the Lab :smileytongue:, finally agreed that the default avatar height would be 2.95 blurps. Ok, then how to decide what would be the right size for houses, furniture, vehicles, animals, trees, etc.? Again, there would be no reference at all to real world. All would have to be found out by experimenting, building different sizes , eyeballing the results and come into agreement which looks good and workable. How plenty of wasted time and effort just because the arbitrary [blurp] unit was invented! See above And the blurp would not have solved the problem of the scale issue in Second Life. Some people would have been ok with avatar sizes close to the 2.95 blurps. But then there are those guys who want to be taller than the next guy. In no time at all the grid would have been teeming with avatars reaching 4.2 blurps or even more. It's possible that after some time the builders would make their builds suitable for avatars who were 3.6 blurps tall, instead of making them suitable for the 2.95 blurps tall default avatars. Questioning the builders "Why do you make your builds oversized?", they would reply "Ah well, that's how the Second Life has evolved, avatars have grown gradually bigger". And we would then have discussion: "Why did Linden Lab made this bad decision and invented the blurp? We don't understand it, it has no reference to anything. Why didn't they use some sensible unit what is already used all over!" As I said already earlier, if there was an arbitrary measurement unit like [blurp] it would just complicate things when creating mesh content for Second Life. Being totally arbitrary no design program would have blurp in their dimension selection. Mostly they have metric and imperial units. A conversion factor between the [blurp] and meters and/or feet or inches would be needed to be able to build proper sized content. So Phil, I still don't get it why you think that it would have been better if we didn't have any relation to real world measurements. As I see it, it is very good decision that virtual worlds do use the same measurements what we use in real world. Then we have something what we understand, a frame of reference when creating content. The reason why I think it would be better not to have an RL unit of measurement is because a few people want to have RL realistic sizes of things like houses and they just don't work. Most people are content with the way that sizes have evolved in SL, but a few people sometimes kick up a bit of a fuss. For most people it doesn't matter at all. It's just a few people who want to create homes in SL according to RL-realistic sizes, so it's better not to have the same unit of measurement (the meter) and the few people won't have anything to make a fuss about. [ADDED info] I found that in Cloud Party the default female avatar is about 1.68 meters tall (if I did the measurement correctly in Maya). She does not look like a midget there, she appears to have very correct size in relation to the environment. Meter appears to be a very good unit for virtual worlds too. No need to invent some random [blurps]. :matte-motes-big-grin: I'm sorry that I can't get really into your post but I'm away from home and posting is inconvenient. I hadn't treally expected to post anything at all.

Pussycat Catnap wrote: 16 wrote: i had a look back and had a remember the deletions started from the comment/suggestion that you and Penny are invalid to chat about realism bc of your anthro avatars. every post that was replied to off that got deleted as well. is fair ok for that post to get deleted and some of the responses to it. include my own is just a pity about all the good posts underneath that had nothing to with that. that got chucked in the bin as well oh! well I completely missed that discussion... Had no idea anyone ever even said that, let alone who or why. It was along the lines of, "It's a bit rich that the two people who complain about avatar height not matching RL human heights have [a couple of animals] avatars." Something like that. I thought it was funny but someone else thought it was rude. Whatever the reason for the mass deletion, it was a stupid thing to do.

Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: But it's not very good to correlate units in 2 different worlds when nothing of the 2 worlds ever meet. The reason why it would have been better to invent a unit for SL is because it would have avoided the frequent RL size / SL size discussions and arguments. The size of things in one world is completely irrelevant to the size fo things in another world, when nothing of the one world is ever in the other world, and vice versa. (1) But they do meet. We have humans in RL, we have human avatars in SL. And other stuff too what we see in RL, they are in SL too. (2) I don't get the idea why virtual world would need some arbitrary measuring system having no correlation to anything at all. 1. No they don't meet. Nothing from the RL world ever gets into the SL world or vice versa. There are humans in RL but there are only avatars in SL - no humans. 2. Because it is a totally different world and the two never meet. So there is no reason at all to equate the measurements in the two worlds. I had a thought earlier. If the SL world's meter is seen as the RL world's yard, SL avatars would be much closer to RL humans. There's no need to do that, of course, because there is no general need to even even try to equate the two worlds.

If 16 is going to be the judge, I want to know exactly what about me she will be judging :smileysurprised:

Czari Zenovka wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: You just concentrate on the nude party and arrange it when I'll be able to attend. If you need me to come and audition for it, just let me know Why did that just make me think of the scene in "The Full Monty" where the guys were standing in line at the unemployment office? lol When I get there, the judges will be saying, "The eagle has landed" lol

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Thank you, Trinity. Now about that audition.... heheheheh, i dont forget Phil...; its planed but need some organization.... im going to ask Czari if she accept to be judge with me hehehehhehe Judge? What will you be judging? I need to know

You're right. I didn't mention the camera position. It was discussed a lot in the other thread in which I said that, during an old thread on this topic, I actually made a 12'x12' room and put an RL-scaled bed in it (just a prim). That was all I put in it even though an RL room of that size would have a lot more furniture in it than just a bed. I adjusted the camera every way I could and found that manoevering in that room was so awkward that it just didn't work. One or two people suggested using the mouselook view, or a pseudo-mouselook view, but they are 2-handed operations, which meant that it was nowhere near as simple and easy as the way things are now - default camera and larger rooms so that furniture can be negotiated very easily.

Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Trying to make SL sizes the same as RL sizes is fighting a losing battle, because SL is a different world which isn't suitable for RL sizes and trying to make it work is too awkward to even bother with. Those are two ways of removing the RL person vs SL avatar height thing. If the length measurement in SL was for example was called [unit] instead of [meter]. How would that made things any better? It would mean that nobody would be saying that avatars are too tall because they are 8'. I.e. RL measurements wouldn't come into it because there is no common unit to measure by. You're right in saying that SL is not RL. But units are units and it is very good that there is a definite exact correlation between units in different environments. There is absolutely no reason to invent new arbitrary units even for virtual world. But it's not very good to correlate units in 2 different worlds when nothing of the 2 worlds ever meet. The reason why it would have been better to invent a unit for SL is because it would have avoided the frequent RL size / SL size discussions and arguments. The size of things in one world is completely irrelevant to the size fo things in another world, when nothing of the one world is ever in the other world, and vice versa.

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: I can't be in this thread much longer but all I really wanted to say is that there are two excellent ways of doing away with the RL/SL size argument altogether, and I posted those in the OP. I like the second one best - the one where SL naturally evolved its scales according to the world that it is, and its scales should not be equated with any other world, such as RL. This is the SL world. It is not the RL world and it doesn't make any attempt to be the RL world. i agree with your point of view... Thank you, Trinity. Now about that audition....

I did see your post, Coby, and I replied to it, but it, and yours, went the way of all the other good posts in that thread. In a nutshell, my reply was that I made the RLm != SLm statement following a suggestion of mine to treat them as different lengths - same as I did in the OP of this thread. That way, the whole RL scale argument doesn't even come up.

Czari Zenovka wrote: Trinity Yazimoto wrote: oh lord ! Im just noticing this thread is turning into a naked one itself hehheheheh... ah yes, 24 to 9... what a diet ! :smileywink: Whoa! What happened to all the posts??? The purple unicorn ate them.

Perrie Juran wrote: I did not RIC anything in this thread. Perhaps one of the Mod's is the Purple Unicorn I had mentioned spurning in my now deleted post about it. I think you've nailed it. It was a mod who once posed as the purple unicorn. Well spotted, Perrie

A friend of mine had pet dragons. She had to hatch them over time so there's a dragon system out there somewhere that you could get quite immersed in.

There you go then There are plenty of RL homes with large rooms but there are huge numbers of them with much smaller rooms. My largest room, for instance is 12' x 11' and the houses round about are smaller. I couldn't do what you've done - build my house to RL scale, furnish it, and move around it well enough, regardless of where the camera is positioned. There's nothing wrong with scaling an SL home 1:1 with RL. In rooms like yours, it's not a problem. All I've been trying to say is that, with huge numbers of RL homes, it can't work well enough in the SL world, and I put foward 2 very good ways of getting rid of the old chestnut of an argument.

It is still my opinion that RL and SL homes cannot be scaled 1:1 and used anywhere near as well as SL homes are used now. Some can be, of course, but most cannot. I can't be in this thread much longer but all I really wanted to say is that there are two excellent ways of doing away with the RL/SL size argument altogether, and I posted those in the OP. I like the second one best - the one where SL naturally evolved its scales according to the world that it is, and its scales should not be equated with any other world, such as RL. This is the SL world. It is not the RL world and it doesn't make any attempt to be the RL world.

Ty, Immy. I couldn't get inside it, perhaps because there's a landing point set. I'm too tall to walk through the door but I couldn't even get through the door when walking crouched, and I was short enough in that position. Anyway, I had a cam around inside and, apart from one very small open-ended room, the rooms look bigger than typical RL rooms, and I'm sure I could have walked around inside comfortably enough with the default camera. By "typical RL room", I mean around 12' x12'. I know that there are plenty of bigger RL rooms around but I'm making the point that SL scales cannot be 1:1 with RL. There are plenty RL scales that do suit SL, of course, but there are too many (average rooms in homes) that don't. Most RL scales would suit SL because of of RL is large spaces. It's in homes where RL scales are usually no good for SL.

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: May I see your house? In 2 previous threads of discussing this topic, nobody has shown me an RL-sized house, even though they've argued in favour of them, and I'd like to see one. hum..... another naked party planed elsewhere ? :smileylol: LOL. It doesn't hurt to ask, does it? lol

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: about the default cam setting, i dont see anything wrong with it since its a "default" one. Default doesnt mean the best or even good, default means default, the one you get when you log at your first day. How this one have been choosen ? Idk, but maybe it was the best one for the person who settled it. Now, we can deplore more about intellectual lazyness of a lot of pp. I mean the information you can get about a good setting is not impossible at all to be find. You have tons of information sources, like blogs, wiki, this forum or others, support groups or even ask to sm1 older than you in sl. Pp doesnt read anymore and they dont search for the info they need, they just expect it will come like this to them.... Yes but, if there is no better setting, then it's pointless trying to find one. And the default setting works perfectly well. I'm not saying that an adjustemnt is worse. What I am saying is that typical RL-sized furnished rooms can't be negotiated anywhere near well enough to be generally acceptable, regardless of the camera setting. Even with the pseudo-mouselook idea in the original thread, it takes 2 hands to move around a furnished room, whereas, with things they way they are in SL, moving around a funished room is perfectly good, and only needs one hand.

May I see your house? In 2 previous threads of discussing this topic, nobody has shown me an RL-sized house, even though they've argued in favour of them, and I'd like to see one.