Kwakkelde Kwak

As long as you don't rig your skirt, there is no reference to the avatar in SL. So the centre of your object will be exactly at the pelvis bone. If your skirt will fit without rigging (which I highly doubt), just move it into position. If you do rig it, the problem will be gone.

Pie Serendipity wrote: it is impossible for the stupid to pretend to be smart, It shows. Posts and posts without any spelling errors and still nothing fruitful. Your true status is also very clear, not a single person seems to take you seriously, for obvious reasons. You're the troll that chokes on everything it's fed.

Pie Serendipity wrote: Kwakkelde Kwak wrote: So at least you can admit I have any arguments, I can't say the same about a single one of your whatdoyouwannacallem. If you were more than semi-competent in English you might approach understanding. You're not, and you don't. Stick to scripting. And, like in pretty much all your posts before this one, you are making things up. I'm not a scripter, no idea where you got that idea. My English might be limited, it's not half as limited as your ability to make a point. Since you joined, this entire thread feels like a driveby shooting, except it's more of a miss and run than hit and run. Plus by now you keep driving up and down the street without any ammo, leaving your car with more holes every single time. btw.. Make up your mind, am I or am I not "an EFLer"?

So at least you can admit I have any arguments, I can't say the same about a single one of your whatdoyouwannacallem.

Pie Serendipity wrote: Do you mean house painting? Like the other Adolf did? Please open a history book or two, one about "the other" Adolf, one about modern art. As I pointed out earlier, according to your argument everybody is an artist. Are you suggesting that architects are not very good ones? Or perhaps half-hearted ones, that want to be seen to be functional on the outside but have rugs on the floor inside that look nice, but that you can trip over and break your neck - as per the Living Room in the example you offer. Huh? According to which argument by me is everyone an artist? My point is that architects are part artist, part engineer. There are great ones and rubbish ones, like in any profession. The carpets in the pictures are functional btw, unlike the cornices for example, or at least the shape of them. Even Mister Functionality realised you can't build a house purely functional. You completely missed the point there. Functionality doesn't build a house.

Pie Serendipity wrote: Remember, Google's business success has little to do with the efficacy of its search algorithm (note the correct spelling to improve the credibility of your arguments in future) and everything to do with its innovative and effective advertising sales model. Actually, I don't "remember" that. Might be because it's something you made up. Credibility? Over one letter? Coming from the person who got an entire NAME wrong? Excuse me for having another language than English as my native one. At least I don't confuse one of best known architects of the 20th century with a football player or musician.

Gromlok Landar wrote: So basically go back into the Material Editor, change the sub-material from checker to bitmap in the multi-sub object, export as Dae then import into the metaverse Change the diffuse map of the submaterial from checker to bitmap, but I take it that's what you mean, so, yes. to the right of Map#4 is the Bitmap box that if clicked, brings up a long menu from bitmap to checker etc. That is where I select bitmap then it goes to my hard drive as I can browse through my textures and select one to use for that area of the Map, did I do that right atleast ? Correctomundo, you can also let 3ds Max show it in your viewport. Highlight "Show Shaded Material in Viewport" when you have the multi/sub material open in your material editor, it's the checker board with lightbulb right above the material name.

Pie Serendipity wrote: ETA: "form follows function" is not a generic tenet of art. It originates from architecture, Wolfgang Loos proclaiming that ornamentation was criminal, with the whole Modernist School jumping on board his bandwagon. If anything, "form follows function" is a denial of the necessity for the involvement of the artist in the design process. Try not arguing against yourself, eh? So the way you see it an artist only makes ornaments and without ornaments there is no art? That makes it pretty hard to explain why modernism is not just an architectural movement, but also one in painting for example. If anything in Loos' designs is important, it's not the lack of ornaments, it's the spacial composition. Not exactly a contractors field, I'd say that's an architect's one and architects are at the very least partially artists. Ever cared to look at some of Loos' interiors btw? Even Adolf (not Wolfgang) himself knew very well that people can't live in a purely functional factorylike building. A beautiful example on this page.

Pie Serendipity wrote: It wasn't a great search engine to begin with - there were lots of better portals which had a massive head start and failed because they confused the user, and are actually still doing so - but people used it because it was simple. The rest is history. And you base this all on..... ? Google used a new algorythm, maybe it took a while before that translated into good results, but it's certainly the reason why Google became such a success. "Far and away the biggest reason for Google's success is that they provide the best search results for their users", "innovations in search technology made it the No. 1 search engine", "Google delivered unusually relevant results compared to the existing search engines" "Page and Brin began the Google project due to their belief that the system used by other search engines was not the best way of giving relevant results" This list can go on and on, just google for it. I'm sure the fact that there aren't too many distractions doesn't hurt one bit, but claiming Google's success is based on it is just ludicrous.

Gromlok Landar wrote: oh crap, that means that the extra 4 faces on the 3d model are coming from the diffuse part, if you go back to my previous long pictured post, it shows default, map and another all in the same one. That's gotta be what's causing it, its the diffuse. That box simply shows the tree, the diffuse is part of the submaterial, which is part of the multimaterial. That's all exactly as it should look. I think we're finally onto something though. What exactly did you use for the diffuse? Your multi/sub looks fine, then the submaterial looks fine, then it looks like you used a checker for at least one of the the diffuse maps. Unlike the material error I have seen quite often when using Arch & Design" materials, the checker really does give problems in dae files. If I use a checker and export the model to dae and import it back in, it shows the extra material, just like your model does. The checker map contains two materials, I think that's what's causing your extra polygons and materials. I'm not sure why you'd use the checker, you want a texture applied to your model eventually, so put that texture in the diffuse slot as bitmap in 3ds Max. You said when your turn off 1-4 which are the diffuse ones, everything is fine ? I was just trying out some things, turning off the 4 submaterials doesn't change the geometry. You have duplicate faces for material 1-5 in the .dae file. This gives the model 5397 triangular polygons. Without that geometry your model has 1821 triangles.

Ah, so the secret behind google's success IS the doodle, which makes us subjects enter more creative search phrases....

Well I had a look at the dae file and if I import it into 3ds Max it has 8 material ID's, so there's clearly something wrong. Without the .max file I can't see why the dae ended up like this though. Everything that should be blue is quadrupled and has faces for ID 1-5. (oh I turned off 1-4, so don't get confused by the missing checkmarks) The material error occurs with any material that's not standard, so any cellular, checker, noise etc will give that. I haven't seen it causing any issues with uploads to SL.

Gromlok Landar wrote: If you want Kwakkelde, I can e-mail the file to you or add you to skype and file transfer it that way. Whichever you prefer, I know some dont feel comfortable giving out their e-mail addy, atleast with Skype, you add someone, you can remove them off your friends list afterwards as well. I sent you a PM about that, can't look at them right now though. Now the file is saved as a .max file, I'm told by other 3d modellers in the 3ds Max group in SL that its best to convert to collapse the stack, convert to FBX then export as dae file to import in worlds. Are you sure they didn't say: "export as fbx, then convert to dae (with the stand alone tool)" ? That's what plenty of Max and Maya users do. Here's a pic of what importer extensions are available for me: [pic] It seems .max isn't one of them. I found FBX to be close to perfect when importing into a scene minus any glitches I get. The .max isn't in the import menu, you can use "merge" instead. (or "replace" to update it, or even use "reference" so you can work on that piece separately)

As far as I can see everything is perfectly fine in 3ds Max, so it' probably the export(er). I still don't understand what you do with your fbx files. The final result needs to be a dae file or you won't be able to upload it to SL. You say you import the fbx files into your scene, why not keep them as .max files? The least you convert the least chances you have of things going wrong. Did you try the 2011 converter to make the final dae file? One other thing that catches my eye, the top of your stack shows the "UVW unwrap", did you try to convert to editable poly before exporting? I don't think it matters, in fact I've exported objects with the modifier stack uncollapsed myself, I'm just running out of ideas at the moment... I asked it before I think, if you could post the files somewhere, I could have a look.

I actually typed and removed two posts about that If any page shows a lot of artistic dribbles, it's google. EDIT and I usually enjoy them too!

I was under the impression that Google became so large because it returned the most relevant results. Good to know it was because they have an empty page.

Sorry to hear things still aren't working. Did you check the number of sides in 3ds Max before exporting (like the picture below)? Make sure you selected all polygons of the model. You could also have some unused ID's, polygons with an ID in 3ds Max, but without a material assigned, they will not show up in the list. Re-apply the material to the model. Just select the model, open the material editor, then assign the material to selection. Then look at the "Polygon: Material IDs" rollout again, uncheck "Clear Selection" (it's hidden by the "No Names" in the picture above). Click "Walls", then "Red Carpet" etc. If any faces are unselected, that means you have some ID's without a material. Alternatively, you could open the statistics (Just hit 7), right click the little plus in the upper left of the viewport, select "Viewport Configuration", go to the "Statistics" tab and select "Total + Selection". That way you can see if the polygons you selected by selecting by ID matches the total amount of polygons of the object. Another thing you can check by using the statistics, is if SL uses exactly twice the amount of faces compared to 3ds Max. Make sure you have triangles selected in the statistics instead of polygons. If the number in SL is twice the number in 3ds Max, I suspect it's the exporter causing the issues. It's still not clear to me what version of 3ds Max and what version of FBX plugin you use. I also don't understand why you export as fbx and more importantly, what you do with that fbx file. If you export as fbx, you could convert that fbx file to dae with a stand alone converter. I think most people use the 2011 version, found in the archives.

You can simply scale the bones in poser. Shift-Ctrl-N then use the dials.

Very nice, I hope you have some great times in there:)

With the 2013.3 version of the plugin, you should be able to export as dae directly. Anyway, if converting an fbx file does the trick, that's good enough I guess. Glad everything worked out

You could be the victim of a weird bug that doubles the faces. I'll have to think about how it worked and look it up. It might have something to do with how you named your object or materials, make sure there are no spaces in their names. The bug allows some cool tricks btw, but in this case it's not what you want. It could also be the fbx plugin version. Can't see what version of 3ds max you are using, but if it's 2012 or 2013, make sure you have the very latest plugin installed from the Autodesk site. It's all a bit blurry, so if that doesn't help I need to look it up (as I already said:) ).

And as I said, in theory, you could have 200 scripts for just 4000 bytes or so because mono scipts can be instances that share memory. That's a very unrealistic scenario of course, but at an average of 10k per script I see nothing strange in 200 scripts for 2MB.

Oh sorry, I forgot to enter the channel and remove the color data I see. I copy pasted from the wiki and thought I'd be nice and adjust it slightly for you so it talks to you rather than show hovertext. My bad, Arton's script should work.

I already told you twice, it is a leftover of a never executed plan by Linden Lab to restrict memory usage by either sim or agent (or both, I forgot). Right now, like you say, it's only used to inform "lag-meters" (or the estate tools which also monitor memory). The memory use doesn't have to be stable though, since you can make the memory limit variable. I also showed you that. The irony is, the function doesn't lower memory use, it actually uses memory. So scripts with the function are less efficient than ones without.

That box is for something else completely. I can't say I ever used it, but it's explained in the 3ds Max help. Don't feel bad about calling what you called a UV map a UV map, that's what most people call it It just confused me in this case. default{ state_entry() { integer numOfSides = llGetNumberOfSides(); llSay( 0,"I have " + (string)numOfSides + " sides."); }} Just to determine if your SL object has multiple faces, put this script in it. If it returns "1" you have only one face, if it returns "4", all your faces are present. That should help to find the issue.