Nacy Nightfire

I don't think "user friendly" applies to any of these programs if you are a beginner. From everything I've read, out of that list of software available to you, Maya is industry standard for animation, so it would make sense that you devote your time learning that particular piece of software first and foremost. Eventually you will want to learn your way around all of these programs to enhance your marketable skills in the industry. But put first things first. I'm familiar with Blender, LIghtwave, Modo, Zbrush, Mudbox and Poser. None are easy and none are easier then the others although I do favor certain programs over others. A gazillion other people will feel exactly opposite to the way I do re: ease of use.

Ahem! As if you don't have enough to do/learn/create. An extremely addicting and useful IPad App is TreeSketch2. It exports as fbx and you can get a free FBX exporter from autodesk here: http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/item?id=10775855&siteID=123112 Did I mention it's free?

I have no idea since I work on static items. And per your mentioning it I now notice there's an obj exporter for $9.99. If 123D isn't enough a time-suck try the free IPad app TreeSketch2. It exports as fbx, but you can get a free fbx converter from the autodesk website for both the PC and the Mac. Have fun! Edited to add link to FBX converter: http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/item?id=10775855&siteID=123112

Here's a way to turn the white backround into alpha using composite nodes right in Blender:

Syle - check these settings: In the render (camera) palette, make sure in "Output" you have RGBA checked (In this picture its not turned on). Then make sure when you add your texture you have checked "Alpha": Finally in the UV window next to where you see "view" there are 3 icons. Turn on the middle one to see alpha transparency in your bake.

There are other's here who will correct me if I'm wrong, but until then I'm guessing you are having an issue with alpha sorting. Your skirt is probably saved with an alpha channel (and if it's not needed you should not save it as a png, but uses bmp or jpg). And the belt has an alpha channel on top of the skirt. Try saving the skirt texture as a bmp (I'm assuming that it doesn't need transparency) and then only use png or tga with alpha for the belt.

I'm tempted to steal that "Searching for the ever-elusive "make it easy" button..." and making that my forum signature :matte-motes-bashful-cute-2: I do have Zbrush, filterforgeand I recently downloaded crazybump (which I haven't delved into yet). If you factor how much time it takes to learn these feature-rich programs, then yes, they might appear to be timesavers, and certainly they are fun to use, but I don't think any of them ultimately adds up to saving any time. You, and other kind folks on the mesh forum, have helped me so much in understanding this process. I've been chipping away at it since I joined SL '07. Prior to that I've had no training or understanding of 3d graphics. It's been a very interesting ride, but a very slow and tedious process and I find I have many, many gaps and areas where I think I understand something, but clearly have the wrong idea about how some things work. Unfortunately this means when I offer advice to people who know even less then I do on this topic, I'm often wrong, and yet I don't realize it. My intentions are good, but I hope I haven't disseminated too much garbage. I'm very humbled by how much I don't know and actually pretty happy there's more of this mountain to climb since the learning part is even more interesting to me then the actual making of stuff.

The use of bump maps always look "gummy" to me. Very unsatisfying. Will the normal maps be influencing bump or actual displacement? Re: bump, I suspect people frequently resort to a greyscale version of their diffuse image, but that can't possibly be accurate, since not all white in a texture is meant to be "up" and the reverse with black. So getting good results from this kind of map takes some real skill, I'm guessing.

From my researching everything related to this on the forum before posting I think alot of folks who are really experienced builders are following your practice. My instincts told me (and probably incorrectly) that the alpha sorting issue might be an issue with this technique, but I'm not really a builder of large objects so it's not something I've personally tested. Apparently the small li increase and possible alpha issues are worth the price to get good resolution and add those baking passes. So it's a big lightbulb that clicked on over my head when Kwakkelde explained this is the reason folks are eagerly anticipating those extra image maps. It just didn't dawn on me that retaining good resolution via tiling in SL was a big part of the reason, if not exactly the reason.

Thanks so much to you as well, Kwakkelde! Even more great info that you explained extremely well.

Thanks again, Chosen. I learned so much here. I'm very happy!

Thanks so much for your speedy response Chosen. I understand your explanation, however why is this not also the case when I repeat the texture right in SL? Is something different going on with the SL texture thingy (technical term) which preserves resolution when you ask it to repeat the exact same texture the exact number of times in SL? edited to add: I mean also in Photoshop before you commit the texture to 1024... are both SL and PS showing the texture as 1024 x the number of repeats in actual pixels? I think that's what you said, but I would have thought SL reduced the texture to 1024 after you asked it to repeat it x number of times. RE-editing to add: I realize I didn't understand the difference between texels and pixels (actually I never heard of a texel before). So I'll study up on the topic and I'm sure your explaination will become much clearer to me (and now I admit I thought I understood what you wrote, but clearly I didn't because I'm missing some important technical info here) Again, thanks very much for the help!

There's something I'm not understanding here. I've spent a few days/many hours testing this out AND doing search/research of past forum threads and still I have no idea what's going on. I'm using Blender. If I take an image that is 1024x1024 and tile it a set number of times to a mesh plane using the SL texture parameters, I get very good close-up resolution. However if I take the very same plane and use either a 1024x1024 or even a 4096x4096 version of the same texture and within blender I identically tile it and then bake 1024x1024 "textures" only (no shader effects, etc.) I get a much blurrier result then in the first instance. (Of course this is for comparison, I wouldn't use blender for simply baking out the texture, what I'm leading up to is getting good resolution when advancing to using shader settings, ao, etc.) I tried using Modo and got similar blurry results, although I'm not too up to speed with Modo, so it could be human error. Is this just a universal thing with using bake? Is there some setting I'm missing? Is the Blender Render just not all that great for baking? Am I inputting the wrong texture type (png) into blender, am I exporting the wrong texture type OUT of blender (bmp)? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

I just noticed from checking the class schedule board at Builder's Brewery that the class for making clothing alphas is back on the schedule for tomorrow (Wednesday 1/30) at 12 PM SL time. I'll be attending myself (if I don't forget ) as there are many ways to make alphas and I'm always looking for an easier way. Judging from other classes this instructor teaches which I have attended in the past, this class should be very helpful.

I'm not certain what is wrong, but often if I find I can't paint it's either one of two cases: 1) I forgot to add a texture and assign the vertices to that texture (Select the vertices in UV sapce and then adding the texture)* 2) Or I forgot to select/highlight what I want to paint in object mode before switching to paint mode. Hope that helps! *Vertex Paint mode applies color information to the mesh vertices not to a texture (although I believe this informationt can be transferred to a texture in Blender - not sure, but probably). It's not comparable to regular texture paint mode.

Correction here. Each face can have only one MATERIAL assigned to it. However that material can have a number of textures linked to it which interact and blend in interesting ways. So you can absolutely add the normal map to a texture slot and set it to up to effect normals and not diffuse color and at the same time add a texture to the stack which effects diffuse, color or a number of other options. You should be able to see from that video how to adjust settings for the normal map. And just google or search Utube for tutorials for setting up a texture to effect diffuse color.

I'm a little late to the party here, but I'll also chime in to say I use Blender on both the Mac (most of the time) and the PC (infrequently) without any problems.

If you are going to upload repeatedly and continue testing and uploading the texture into SL, there's a better way - least with the standard SL viewer which is the one I use. When uploading textures opt for the "local" option and load the texture. It's a free temporary way to load textures, but it's not the same as loading temporary textures in the manner that some viewers allow. With the "local" option, SL links to the image file on your computer and as you go in and out of photoshop (or gimp, etc.) and re-save the file, it automagically updates in SL when you re-click the name of the file. The file is temporary, so when you get your final results you will have to upload as a regular texture and pay for that so others can see it, too. While it's in local mode only you will see these local textures and everyone else will see grey until you finally upload and apply the texture the standard way. If you crash, log out or change the texture name you will lose your link to the file, but it's easy as pie to reupload it as a new local texture and continue testing.

Assuming you mean assigned in Blender you need to select the avatar mesh in Edit mode (top or bottom - whichever cooresponds to the clothing for which you are making the alpha) and in the UV window click X to delete whatever texture might be currently assigned to those faces, and then hit the "+" button to assign a new texture. In the "add texture" pop up menu you can change the color of the texture you assigned by clicking on the black strip and accessing the color wheel. Slide the bar up until the texture is white.

You can also avoid retopologizing by creating a very low, but organized all quad poly mesh in Maya and then exporting that as an obj to import into Zbrush. From there you can subdivide the mesh to get the density you need for sculpting details and then make a displacement map to capture the details you've created. I don't use Maya so I can't give you instructions on the next step which is applying the displacement map back in Maya, but check out Zbrush Central's forum, that will be a goldmine of info for just what you want to do. Try using the search "low poly game assets".

Select your Avatar mesh and in UV space set up a blank white texture assigned to the UV faces of the part of the body for which you've modeled a clothing mesh. Next select your clothing mesh and go into the Object tab in the Properties tab and set that mesh to Display>Wireframe so it will be set as wireframe view independent of the avatar mesh and and it can be painted through. Light your scene well and reselect the avatar mesh and go into Texture Paint mode. Set you color to black and paint what you want to be "alpha" on the avatar using the wireframe of the clothing mesh to guide you. You will see your black paint strokes appearing on white texture you set up and assigned in the UV space. You can correct any mistakes by "erasing" black with white and visa versa. Save the file. Then set up your Composite nodes to turn the black and white image you just made into an image where Black is alpha, as follows: From the drop down list in the first node select the image you just saved. (note the viewer doesn't show the final image, but if you turn on backdrop image you will see it correctly.) You can continue to test and correct this image, however each time you make a change you need to reselect that image in the first node otherwise it won't update. And you can simultaneously paint on both the avatar mesh in the mesh edit view and the flat image in UV space (set up for painting, of course) if you find you are having a hard time reaching some places. When finished and ready for testing save the texture you painted and processed via nodes, from the UV edit menu. The image should be called something like Viewer Node in the drop down image loaded image list. In SL set up your new Alpha clothing file. Instead of uploading your texture the the standard way, select "*local" and then load the file. This is temporary and it links SL and the file you have just made. Anyone else viewing your avatar will just see grey. As you return to blender to refine and make changes, resave the texture with the same file name. Then when you return to second life click on that same name you previously loaded into local view it will refresh the file and you will see the changes. Don't forget when you finalize your texture you need to re-upload it in the normal way otherwise no one will see it. Again, anything uploaded in local view appears grey to everyone else. Also if you crash or close out your application you will need to re-establish your link to the file in local view. There are, no doubt, many ways to make clothing alphas. This is just one I came up with. It's not necessarily the most direct and hopefully those who are actually working with clothes (I'm not currently) can share their method or improve upon this. Merry Xmas!

Builder's brewery has a class on making Alpha's for clothing. Right now the schedule appears thin due to the holidays, but when it picks back up, I'm sure it will be repeated. I haven't taken this class, but the instructor is excellent. http://www.buildersbrewery.com/calendar/

Hi FatalAttract0n, Rather then posting twice you can contact a person you are trying to get an answer from via the Forum IM system. Note the little envelope next to your name at the top right of the screen when in forum mode. Now that I've happened upon this thread as a re-surfaced item, I've read your request. This is not a beginner/novice project, but one which was was posted in response to a forum member who specifically requested a bow tutorial, who following my instructions and make a very lovely bow. I'll take that as confirmation that the instructions are adequate if the person has about an advanced beginner set of Blender skills. My intent wasn't to make this a beginner lesson, as that is very time consuming and I can't spare the time, but I highly recommend you take the free (please tip the instructors!) lessons at Builders Brewery which is an excellent place to get beginning building lessons of all types. I believe they have a whole series on Blender. When you get a bit beyond the novice level come back to this thread and I'm confident you'll be making beautiful bows. Edited to add: you added to your last post my initial description of my method for making this bow. If you read futher postings on the thread you will see I gave more explicit instructions and provided a diagram.

Setting custom orientations is a feature of Blender I'd forgotten about and when I needed it I couldn't figure out how to create them in the current version of Blender since the way you create custom orientations has changed since ver. 2.49. I found the following video on Youtube to be very helpful, so I thought I'd share the link for other Blender users: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3dVQmPojbg&feature=player_embedded

What Chosen Few said. AND.... What I see as the highlight of your post is "I want to try to make some simple mesh houses." Well then Blender is a great choice because unless you are going to go into animation, video with special effects, etc. you simply do not need an expensive 3d modeling/animation program for your SL mesh building needs. If you plan to specialize in mesh houses then you do not need anything elaborate then Blender (even that has more features then you'll ever use) and it's a good place to start learning 3d modeling concepts. It's also used by a large number of SL builders who can come to your rescue here on the forum when you run into problems or have questions. What you might invest in is a good graphics program since everything here by necessity has to be low poly and that makes good texturing skills is very important. But my point is you can make stunning mesh houses in Blender.