Kwakkelde Kwak

1st observation No idea why nobody told you, but it has been that way forever. The slider goes to from 0.0 to 2.0, any higher value is set by the debug menu. 2nd observation Has to be a bug, but I don't see it. Everything here works like one would expect. Everything here works as it should. People shouldn't set their LoDFactor to 4 unless they have a very high end machine. Well if they do, they have no right to complain about low fps anyway.

steph Arnott wrote: 200 scripts or more and under 2mb, i do not think so. Why not? 2MB = 2x1024x1024 = 2097152 bytes Divided by 200 that's a little over 10kb per script. LSL scripts use 16kb, mono scripts anything between 3kb or so and 64kb. Seems like a very realistic scenario to me.

I wasn't talking about the firewall or any other safety net. There must have been a bug in the firmware of my router. Come to think of it, my wired connection wasn't fine either, in fact that was the direct reason I went to the shop to let them have a look. The wireless connection had issues from the get go though, unlike my wired one. The computershop people were able to reload the firmware in a matter of minutes, so it's worth a try. For the time being and to see if your issues are because of the wireless connection, you could drag a temporary wire between router and computer. That costs a couple of bucks or euros or pounds, even in the middle of farmland. Make sure not to trip over it:)

A shot in the dark... Did you already get your firmware reloaded? That did wonders for my wireless connection. My wired connection was just fine, but my wireless gave me disconnects and all sort of other connection and speed issues both on XP and Linux (with a brand new router, 80% signal and a 150/150 Mbit connection). $150 a month for a 10 Mbit connection btw? Whether that's a stable connection or not, that sounds really expensive. I pay about a third of that for 15 times the speed plus tv and phone.

Medhue Simoni wrote: I'd replace TALENT, with PASSION. IMHO, no1 is born any specific way. Our differences at birth, are hardly great enough to exclude most people from any field of interest. It's not a matter of opinion. Research on identical twins separated at birth indicates up to half of what we are and do and like is genetic. They share the same interests, like the same food etc. Still, that's not even half, so I'd say the second part of that sentence is true. Passion and practice might make perfect (or better anyway), it's not the same as talent. I've seen people picking up a guitar and play like they were born playing. Whether talented people maintain their advantage over others who practice every day is another matter. Talent doesn't equal result, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Both talent and passion go a long way. It takes both to excel at something though.

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: MissHolyDiverAngel wrote: I am been having the same propblem and having a hard time trying to stay on without lagging! I'm on a nice machine too as well! Mine is Intel Celeron 2.46 Two gigs of ram. My other one was dual core 2 the same thing, and there times It can lag but not bad. My celeron does lag very hard core! Well there's your problem right there.. 2 GB of ram? you need a lot more. That depends. I have a computer running Linux, 4 GB of RAM. When idle, it uses about 10% of that memory, about the same as an XP installation. SL adds another 15% or so. Going by those numbers, 2GB should be plenty, as long as you don't run a lot of other memory intensive applications. My Win 7 computer uses about 2GB when idle. Any addition, SL or not, would mean 2GB is not enough. So again, it really depends. @OP Just open the task manager (assuming the computer in question runs Windows) and see if there is any memory left. It could also be an issue with the graphics card or internet connection. It would help if you posted all your specs. In SL open the help menu and click "About Second Life", post the results here on the forums. Don't expect any fireworks from either computer, especially on higher graphical settings, both machines are pretty slow by today's standards.

No solution unfortunately. Here in the Netherlands I see the very same though, packet loss of 0.9% (normally 0.0) and a ping of 250-300 ms (normally 150-200). I don't get a bad response though. Maybe you're doing more than standing around

Orca Flotta wrote: Hi Sandra, forget the table. :smileyhappy: LL are using it to determine the "perfect" graphics settings for you but, honestly now, who needs that? If your graphics card isn't in the table, SL will gray out a lot of options. Stroll the forums for everyone with a high end GTX780, not being able to turn on any of the fancy things. Right now the 700-series NVidia cards need a manual addition in the table file. @OP As far as I know you can copy the table from your Firestorm installation and put it in your SL installation folder. It's just a text file, nothing fancy.

It was a long time ago, I guess I was mistaken about the number. Glad you figured it out.

I know it sounds stupid, but for some reason that was the case. Several people tried with the same results. One or two or four or more materials were fine, only three gave these issues. Only one way to find out if you're experiencing the same. btw.. Your LI might go up, since that's calculated by (among other things) size as well.

I assume by "mesh loading distance" you mean LoD switch distance. When mesh was new, we (various forum users) discovered a bug where objects with I think 3 materials confused Second Life making it ignore one of the size values in all calculations. The result was exactly as you describe. Joining two objects in Blender changes the number of materials (SL faces), so that makes sense. You could try to add another material, or combine two. Maybe LL never fixed this bug? Maybe it's back? Maybe it's something else completely?

I have no clue which paragraphs you refer to. par 5 is the one I quoted completely. Are we looking at the same ToS? You also confuse me by saying "CG Textures retains ownership of their work, so we never had the licence to use their textures" CG retaining ownership does in no way imply that we have no license to use them. The two are completely different things. CG Textures doesn't allow reselling of textures (as textures), LL now claims that right. That's new and that's where everything goes wrong.

You could even take out the "except break the law" part, since nobody is allowed to break the law. That would save at least another $85,000. (How much do spaces cost?) That would be very nice. Problem is LL would have to verify every single upload and verify it again and still risk not having verified enough. That would cost a whole lot more. Even worse, if those would be the ToS, LL wouldn't be able to move, show, let alone distribute our content, because they wouldn't have any rights or licenses to do so. LL needs certain rights to make Second Life work, they don't need the right to sell our content "for any purpose whatsoever".

Now if Linden Labs would correct their mistake and "repair" this phrase: Except as otherwise described in any Additional Terms (such as a contest’s official rules) which will govern the submission of your User Content, you hereby grant to Linden Lab, and you agree to grant to Linden Lab, the non-exclusive, unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, and cost-free right and license to use, copy, record, distribute, reproduce, disclose, sell, re-sell, sublicense (through multiple levels), modify, display, publicly perform, transmit, publish, broadcast, translate, make derivative works of, and otherwise exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Content (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats, on or through any media, software, formula, or medium now known or hereafter developed, and with any technology or devices now known or hereafter developed, and to advertise, market, and promote the same. Then the rest of us would probably be satisfied as well

Jer Straaf wrote: "I haven't tested myself, but the person I made them for gave me the results." Troubleshooting? Assume nothing. Trust no one. Hmmm, you never heard that one, Kwak? Let me rephrase. I haven't tested thoroughly. The person I made the car and track for has tested it thorougly, afterall that person is the one who's going to use the object, so it has to be built to their standards, not mine. Of course I've tried different setups and I posted the results. "Mesh" is something you see on your screen, it's not something the Havoc engine sees. The Havoc engine sees boxes, cylinders, spheres, hulls and triangles. You should design anything physical with that in mind. Worst case scenario is making the vehicle's appearance in mesh, then making the physical shape with a couple of prim boxes. According to your findings, it would be impossible to get stuck then. I'm not questioning your experiences, I am questioning how many different vehicle physical setups you've tested. I have tried triangluar based, analysed hulls and complete hulls, set by the edit menu. Bits that stick out, like wheels, I set to "None", making it impossible to get stuck on those. Impossible to get stuck would be one hull, that's just how the physics engine works. The physical shape of such a setup is pretty poor, but you don't need many hulls to represent a shape close to that of the visible car and if those hulls intersect, it should be impossible to get stuck just the same. Anyway, I haven't been able to get the car I made get stuck in any convex hull or prim wall, believe me, I've tried. My guess is most cars in SL are simply made with too many elements and too many gaps.

At least now I know it doesn't work, although that surprises me. Luckily there's the converter that still works for you:)

High memory usage and a memory leak aren't the same. Something as simple as Firefox gobbles up a couple of 100 MBs quite easily. 800 MB for SL isn't something that is out of the ordinary. With 4GB, you should be able to fit SL in there, as long as you don't have many other programs open at the same time. If you do, my suggestion would also be to buy more RAM. EDIT Well what do you know... A viewer update with "This release addresses a memory leak and an issue with environmental reflections." in the release notes

The native exporter for Maya 2011 is Autodesk FBX plugin 2011. The native exporter for Maya 2013 is Autodesk FBX plugin 2013. So it's useless to compare with any of your friends using an older version. The standalone FBX converter will work as you noticed, the question however is: will an upgraded 2013.3 plugin also work, the way it does for 3ds Max. That way you don't have to convert.

Jer Straaf wrote: Why is everyone here dancing around the real issue? The real issue is MESH! Prim vehicles do not get stuck in prim or sculptie walls, other vehicles, etc. Period. Sculptie vehicles do not get stuck in prim or sculptie walls, other vehicles, etc. Period. MESH vehicles will interpenetrate and get stuck inside, well, just about anything in SL. I had a go at a vehicle recently, earlier I did some tracks with collision walls for the corners. I haven't tested myself, but the person I made them for gave me the results. My conclusion isn't the same as yours. As far as I can tell, the problem is the physical shape of all objects involved. The physics engine recognises "elements". The problem with triangular based meshes (the ones you have when mesh items are not analysed on upload and are set to "prim", but also cut and hollowed and otherwise distorted prims set to physics type "prim") is every single triangle is treated as an element. So one element of the car can be on one side of a wall while the other is on the other. With the shear amount of elements it's not a surprise getting stuck is easy. If you however analyse on upload, or set the physics type of your car to "hull", the physics engine works with (surprise) hulls. Every hull is an element and there will be fewer hulls than there would be triangles, hence less chance of getting stuck. Short version, use hulls for you physical shape and chances of getting stuck will be pretty much gone.

Of course I understand the exporters themselves aren't exactly the same, they work with a different source. I would find it really sloppy if the resulting files weren't the same though, expecially given the involvement of Autodesk in the collada format. Even with a different steering wheel, I bet both your Dodges turn left if you turn them counterclockwise Anyway, the reason I was asking, is because the same 3ds Max and Maya versions seem to be affected and both (not working with SL) .dae results can be fixed with the same standalone FBX converter. The problem just seems so similair. I used the converter too, before I found the updated exporters. Always nice to be able to remove one step from the process. My dae files read <COLLADA xmlns="http://www.collada.org/2005/11/COLLADASchema" version="1.4.1"> on top btw.

Chosen Few wrote: Unless anything has changed recently, SL's COLLADA implementation is too old to work directly with Maya 2012 and newer. Are you really sure about that? I can't think of a reason why the Autdesk exporter for Maya is any different from the one for 3ds Max. The 2012 and the very first 2013 versions of the Autodesk FBX exporter didn't work well with SL. The updated exporters (I use 2013.2 with 3ds Max Design 2013) work just fine.

WADE1 Jya wrote: hehe that would be so cool if it was ninjas But ninjas don't let themselves be pushed around.

Rhys Goode wrote: I am a bit suprised that a dimple on a sphere has this drastic an impact, but only a little. The dimple has such a big effect because the havoc engine recognizes a sphere as "a sphere", it's the same for a box and cylinder. As soon as you hollow, dimple, twist or alter the shape in any other way, the object is no longer a mathematical sphere, box or cylinder. The result is that the engine triangulates the physical shape. So instead of one physical entity, you end up with a couple of hundred, some very small. That has a big impact on the calculation.

Vick Forcella wrote: Kwakkelde Kwak wrote: There should not be a single reason why LL needs the rights to sell any uploads (besides selling on the marketplace which would be "providing the service") as far as I can see. They can't. The only right we have is IP rights, but that is US law. LL can take pictures of anything, everywhere and use that for promotion. When an account is closed LL will obtain all rights, according to their TOS. And LL can close an account for any reason, or no reason at all. Oh I think you misunderstood me there. In a previous thread on this subject, I said that LL might need the right to sell "our" items on the marketplace. We get "paid" in L$, which isn't actual currency. People can buy with real money on the marketplace though, the money goes to a LL bank account. So LL is selling and handing the creator "tokens". The "providing a service" would cover this I think. However, I think the new ToS allows LL to sell our items directly on the marketplace or anywhere else, the ToS clearly say we keep our rights, but license LL to use them as they please. I don't think they ever will, not even when accounts are closed. It's just a bit creepy that they can, at least with content uploaded after this change in ToS.

Going by your screenshots, it looks like your armature is rotated and some bones are moved. No idea how to do it in Blender, but you should reset everything to scale and rotation 0,0,0.