Myra Wildmist

Faithless Babii wrote: The Lost Gardens of Appolo...had a huge amount of traffic yet closed...why? They failed to utilise that traffic in a way to pay sim tiers Id guess.(do you ever leave tips for those sims you explore on? Or buy anything they have to offer for example?) There was a big discussion about this (somewhere ) a while ago...so reducing tier wouldnt really have helped if people dont use the traffic they have to make ends meet? Dont forget that some people just do tire of the "hobby" of owning a sim...and go off to do other things. Then you have sims opening with little or no business plan, just hoping to make a stab at collecting rents, or selling enough to make the tier..reducing tiers "a little" wont help them either. Eventually they will not want to pay the tab and close up shop. It is possible to own a sim and make it pay, it takes work and you have to be prepared to be flexible and keep up to date with trends. Good point, Faithless. But I don't think every sim needs to be about making money and that's maybe part of the problem. Would if make sense to give a price break to sims that benefit the sl community? I do tip and buy, but I'd bet I'm in the minority. One thing about tipping, though... I don't think most of the people who wander through sims have any idea how much a sim costs. I know I started tipping a little more when I realized that.

After being in SL for almost 9 months, I'm just now beginning to gain some understanding of land, so forgive me if I have some newb misconceptions on this topic. I'm a big sim hopper. I love to explore and discover new sims. I've noticed, though, that while sims come and go, it seems more sims are going, and sometimes very enjoyable sims. That's fine to a degree: If your sim isn't getting visitors, maybe it's just not meant to be. But what about popular sims, sims which seem to get a lot traffic? (e.g. I recently read about the Lost Gardens of Apollo closing down. http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2011/06/second-life-sim-deathwatch-lost-garden-of-apollo.html) It seems to me, I've seen a fair number of sims pull up stakes and close, just in the few months I've been here. Is this normal? Or is it the bad economy combined with the tier pricing that's causing this? The whole land pricing formula doesn't make much sense to me, frankly. For instance, everywhere I go, there almost seems to be more land abandoned and for sale than owned land. If that's so, then something is probably wrong with the way land is priced in SL. It kinda indicates there just aren't enough people buying. It seems everyone would benefit if they lowered the tier pricing even just a little. More people might buy land, which would mean more money for the economy, and some of these sims would stick around a little longer if it wasn't so expensive for them. Am I on track about this? Is there something I'm missing? (Very possible.)

Cerise Sorbet wrote: Hi, when mesh comes out it will be possible to wear them as attachments that bend with the standard avatar skeleton. If we throw on an alpha layer to hide the standard avatar, those meshes can serve as complete replacements. Animation will work, a few shape settings will work, but the full shape editor and standard face/hand expressions won't be available at this point. True full replacements of the avatar, custom skeletons, etc. are on the wish list and might happen, but there are no guarantees for if and when. Thank you, again, Cerise. This is very informative. Are you saying shapes will be attachments when mesh arrives? Or just that, if you want to, shapes can be treated as attachements? Will we still be able to edit and create shapes the old way?

Is it possible to upload your own shape, say one created in a 3-d program? (I'm sure the answer is no, but sometimes it's worth asking.) Will a new original shape be coming out with the introduction of mesh?

tyvm.

Underneath it all, whether we're male or female, furry or robot, we're all a bunch of polygons. :D (Ctrl-shift-r) There's an example in this thread: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Technical/Jagged-Edges/qaq-p/791343 This is sort of a geeky question. Do all shapes have the same number of polygons underneath? Are all sl shapes molded from the same shape, essentially? I would think there would be at least two different starting shapes under it all, a male shape and a female shape, and they might have a different number of polygons, but I don't know. Are there different original shapes for robots and furries? Is the original shape Ruth? (Original shape is probably the wrong term. Sorry.)

It does, guY. ty. I wonder if LL is going to provide new AVs. I'm guessing they're not. I don't get that sense, anyway. This thread got me interested in this: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Technical/Jagged-Edges/qaq-p/791343 I'd love to see those more detailed models in SL, and mesh seems to open the possibility.

Thank you for the link. I'm looking for a body shape example, if one is available, somewhere.

I came across this on a thread I started: http://juicybomb.com/2011/06/03/yabusaka-mesh-avatar/ And, now, that's gotten me interested in mesh. I downloaded the Project Viewer, but I didn't see any sample mesh items in my inventory. Is there a download for one of these mesh sample shapes somewhere? Would someone point me to one, please? I'd love to try it out. Thanks. Total newb to this, but interested in learning.

Thanks, Peggy. I understand. I can crop my photos. I does seem like a bit of an oversight on LL's part. I get that pictures are treated like textures, so maybe, technically, that's problem. Maybe LL needs to rethink the way they handle photos.

ummm but there is. 16:9 is not 2:1. so there's some loss there. sorry, did I miss something?

That all seems a little odd. Maybe the aspect ratio isn't important to a photo. I think I can see that, but I would think you would want to maintain the proper dimensions when a photo is uploaded to sl. Having to upload a photo in sizes that are powers of 2 seems very limiting and not very user friendly. Is there a technical reason for this?

I'm just starting out, playing with photos, so sorry if this is a dumb question. I read this help entry, but I don't think it addressed my question: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Texture_aspect_ratios When I take a photo or get one from someone else, is there a way to know what the proper aspect ratio (e.g. 16:9, 4:3, 16:10) is, without having to go through trial and error? Maybe a related question. I don't see anything about screen resolution or aspect ratios in Viewer 2. Does a photo I take in sl inherit these properties from my computer's graphic settings? Thanks for any help.

You can only work around the polygons, only so much, I guess. :matte-motes-wink: Does their going to mesh have anything to do with this? Would mesh make it easier for them to introduce new and better avatar meshes? (Btw, I have almost no idea what mesh is, so I might be throwing that term around very loosely. ) Marianne Little wrote: The avatar mesh is really bad, old and outdated. I stopped to think I could make a "Perfect" shape and settled for "Good enough". I think that I had to add a lot of body fat and would still have those jagged angles and weird breaks. And I don't want to have a plus size avatar in SL. I get along with a "Good enough" shape, poses that don't twist and distort the body too much, and then a bit of post-processing. I really wish LL would give us new body mesh. Myra Wildmist wrote: Marianne Little wrote: Adding this link: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Technical/Jagged-Edges/qaq-p/791343 Ishtara posted a picture of what the mesh looks like. Body fat helps to smooth out the lines connected in angles. Look at those shoulders and breasts, it is not much smooth softness there! (Post #2 in the link) Same applies for male shapes. Reduce muscle mass just a few points and add body fat the same number. You will still look lean, not obese at all. I read through that thread, Marianne. If I understand it, there's only so much you can do to get rid of jagged edges, due to the limitations of the underlying models. Is that right?

Marianne Little wrote: Adding this link: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Technical/Jagged-Edges/qaq-p/791343 Ishtara posted a picture of what the mesh looks like. Body fat helps to smooth out the lines connected in angles. Look at those shoulders and breasts, it is not much smooth softness there! (Post #2 in the link) Same applies for male shapes. Reduce muscle mass just a few points and add body fat the same number. You will still look lean, not obese at all. I read through that thread, Marianne. If I understand it, there's only so much you can do to get rid of jagged edges, due to the limitations of the underlying models. Is that right?

Thank you so much, everyone. I'm getting lots of insight into shapes from this thread. It's very helpful.

Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Sorry if I came off as critical of anyone's choice. I didn't mean to. I wasn't criticizing anyone's choice of the barbie shape. Just that it seems to be the prevalent choice in shapes. Geez, I love the Wicked Witch. I still would love to hear opinions on what makes a shape good?

MollyHampshire wrote: I think a good shape is one that doesn't look like barbie, unique is good. Amen, Molly. Yet, the majority of shapes in sl seem to be based on Barbie. ; )

This is kind of a general question and I guess it might spark the "realistic" avatar debate, but I'm wondering, what do others think makes a shape good? I have my own theories, like lack of bumpiness, smooth features, and reasonably believable proportions, but what do you think? Oh, and any suggestions for places with good shapes? Thanks

If you buy something and all you get is a little orange box in your inventory under objects, chances are very good it will have to be unpacked. You need to find somewhere you can unpack the box in that case. Some vendors are nice and auto-unpack your stuff for you and put it all in a folder. So, yes, you'll sometimes have to rez your purchase and unpack it. If you try to put on an object that needs to be unpacked, you'll end up wearing a box on your head. Does anyone know if there's an easy way to check if an object needs to be unpacked? @Cerise. Oh, i didn't know that about the default attach point. : )

I've been tattoo shopping recently. In addition to many of the places already mentioned, I'd recommend Wicked Tattoos. They have some nice freebies, as a bonus. https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/30966 And Envi has some nice piercings - I have two of their belly piercings. https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/31249?search[category_id]=5&search[maturity][]=General&search[maturity][]=Moderate&search[maturity][]=Adult&search =1&search[per_page]=12&search[store_id]=31249

That's very helpful, Vania, I know I'll play around with it. Thank you for releasing it free, too. I think that's incredibly generous of you.

ty, keli and venus. : )

I'm still playing with my physics : D In V2, it's pretty easy to turn off your T position, play an animation for walking or dancing, and edit your appearance while the animation plays. That's really handy for physics editing. In Phoenix, though, it stops the animation when I go to edit my appearance. Not so handy. I turned off the T-positioning under preferences, but the animation still stops playing. Did I miss a setting somewhere or does V2 actually have an advantage over phoenix? Thanks

ty, kolby. considering... However, if you have any thoughts on my question about drag...