Kwakkelde Kwak

You can change the normals after using your XForm modifier. I'm not sure what causes your problem, but you can select "backface culling" in object or layer properties to show only the positive side of the faces, like in SL. btw, which dae exporter are you using?

Can you post a picture of your bleepy and messed up texture? I suspect it is because you render on channel 3 while the UV mapping is done on channel 1, but I'm not sure. Anyway, why bake a diffuse map in the first place? Best case scenario is you get your original diffuse bitmap back.

You can simply change the viewport clipping: right click on "perspective" in the perspective viewport check "viewport clipping" on the right side of the viewport you'll see a yellow line with two trangles, drag the lower one downwards

All you need is a verified account/payment method. So you do not need a premium account.

Every material has its own dedicated UV map. So you can use 8 seperate maps, just like you can in Maya. Whether they overlap or not is entirely up to you, it depends on what you are trying to accomplish.

I'm pretty sure the product you saw has baked in specular highlights and ambient occlusion. The new materials, which are not introduced yet, will support specular maps. The realtime occlusion is already available in SL, but you'll need to dial up the display settings.

I completely agree, one more thing I'd like to add. If it wasn't for programs like Max or Maya, Blender would be no where near as extended as it is right now. A lot of features and even some of the UI seem to be more or less copied from the commercial software. The rendering in cycles was used in the commercial products before it was introduced in Blender (Iray was available in 3ds max in early 2011) for example and the material editor looks suspiciously close to the one in Max. One could say the same for Open Office vs MS Office and Photoshop vs Gimp. This means two things: For a good development of the free software there's a need for commercial counterparts, breaking new grounds and it means the commercial product is usually one step ahead, both in adding features and in getting rid of bugs.

I have 3DSMax 2013 (Design) and it certainly didn't cost me $15000. The only way I see to work with bvh files is by using the biped, which has more and different bones than the SL skeleton. This biped is no different from the 2011 one as far as I know. Maybe you're confused with some other program?

Coby Foden wrote: Amethyst Jetaime wrote: To play a looped sound will not work b ecause people walk at different speeds and it would be strange to hear footsteps out of sync with the avatars walk. Whatever walk animation one uses the speed is always the same. People will travel at the same speed, as in meters per second, they won't all take an equal amount of steps per second though. One could build animations with very short but fast steps, or very big ones while walking slower. This also means it's impossible to synch any footpath sounds to avatars. I'm not a scripter, but I think it's pretty much impossible to let the footpath script keep track of multiple avatars without tremendous amounts of scriptload, if it's possible in the first place. The object would have to determine who are stepping onto it, if the persons are moving or not and if they have left.

Right click the object, then select "edit". Look for the number after landimpact.

Like Maya apparantly does, 3ds max has excellent "official" tutorials. They are updated and archived every year. Autodesk 3ds Max Services & Support I can't really add to anything Chosen said, just go through at least one entire set of them to get yourself familiar with all the functions and tools before you start building one specific type of object. Also try and find other places to make some money with the software you got, unless this is all an expensive hobby. US$7000 is about 1.7 million lindens, you'll probably have a hard time making that much any time soon building items for SL. How did you manage to buy a 2012 version of both programs anyway? Just curious.

I'm not going to argue if you say you can see the difference, but I am wondering how the 1024 to 512 reduction works, what steps there are between your photoshop and the end users screen. Btw, you're by no means alone as far as using 1024s goes and I'm not judging...

I highly doubt the 1024 makes a difference for clothing layers. From what I heard the 512 ones are even better since the 1024 to 512 reduction is done by a program like photoshop rather than SL. It's possible Linden Lab changed the 512 to 1024, but again, I doubt that. It doesn't make a real difference either way since what's passed around SL is 512 so the 1024 only takes a bit longer to upload to the server. The problem with 1024s for everything such as vendors instead of 512 isn't just the rezzing speed.(Although the 4MB vs the 1MB of video memory they use makes quite a difference in performance). It's network load aswell. No idea how busy your shop is, but imagine 20 people standing around having to load everything onto their viewer. 1024 textures take about half a MB each in JP2 format so 20 x 0.5 = 10MB that has to be transferred, instead of just 2.5 for the equivalent 512 textures. So if you have 20 vendors in sight, 1024s will result in 20x10=300MB. The fact people haven't complained is because it all adds up. People won't notice the performance difference between a small or big texture if it's just one or two objects, they will notice if it is everything in the sim.

i was just kidding about the layer/channel, the point was TGA supports them aswell. And do you use 1024s for clothing layers? or 1024s in general?

A couple of things, TGA files don't have a transparent layer, nor does PNG. They both have an alpha channel though. For the TGA, save as 32 bit instead of 24. That should work. Clothing templates for clothing applied directly on the avatar don't need 1024x1024 textures. All the textures applied to either head, upper body or lower body are baked into single 512x512 textures. Those textures are sent to the server and back to all viewers. So a 1024x1024 uses four times more memory and will look exactly the same. @OP can you post a picture with your problem?

YT Upsilon wrote: Okay, just to clear this up. I contacted Poser World and they replied that their Poser / DAZ studio content is royalty free for commercial use. The real issue, as has already been mentioned, is that the content is too complicated for SL at the moment. However, you can tweak textures to use in your SL creations. As per this thread from Daz 3d. http://www.daz3d.com/shop/tc2-second-life-avatar Please don't ask me how, I'm new to all this, and that's how I ended up in this thread, I was actually looking for answers. LOL I'm not sure how the relationship between GMP Services (the owner of Poser World) and Smith Micro Systems (The owner of Poser) or DAZ Productions (The owner of DAZ 3D) is, but it's pretty clear they are not the same. So although their work may be royalty free after purchase or free download, that says absolutely nothing about the content of either Poser or DAZ. If you want a model to make mesh avatars and you don't want to build from scratch, a good option is MakeHuman. From their blog: "Content created with MakeHuman is licensed under the CC0 license". The model isn't nearly as polygon heavy as the Victoria model and looks very clean. I suggest you replace the teeth and eyes though.

Thanks for confirming, that's what I suspected. There's a catch though. You can't use objects with spaces in their names, that will give an error on upload. Others have noticed the same for materials and textures, although I'm pretty sure I managed to upload a model with a space in the material name. Anyway, better safe than sorry and avoid spaces altogether.

It would be very useful to know which program you're using...

Marielle Caerndow wrote: Btw, exporting directly from Max 2011, not using the FBX-converter Another thing there:) Can anyone using 3ds max 2012 confirm the 2013.2 exporter doesn't need the workaround with fbx? It works for 3ds max 2013 and I'm not rolling back just to check this.

Marielle Caerndow wrote: Finally: if you model in Quads, you might want to know how your model will look in SL after beeing triangulated. You can achive this in 3dsMax by going into the object's properties, and there uncheck 'Edges only'. Afterwards you will see the 'invisible' edges that divide your Quads into Tris. Since you mention that, if the object is an editable poly, you can change the direction of that dividing line in a quad by selecting the polygon then clicking retriangulate. btw, are you 100% sure this will show the triangulation the same way it will be in SL? I think I remember the Blender folks having to triangulate before export to have control over the final triangulation in SL. Isn't the same the case for any other 3d program?

There is absolutely no need to work in quads for SL. The reason most models you'll see on sale are made out of quads is that quads are easier to modify, both by your software and by yourself. If you have a full quad model you can subdivide very smoothly for example. A clean topology also lets light bounce off more lifelike and smooth. For a final model however you can have triangles, in many cases they will save a ton of geometry, which should be the focal point for a platform like SL. Try making a cylinder cap with quads, it can be done, but it will take a lot of unnecessary vertices in a flat plane. I'd say avoid loose triangles and use quads where you can to keep a clean topology, but in some cases triangles are simply the better choice. And yes a quad is always two triangles.

kiramanell wrote: Sloppy, I suppose. But as long as it's effect is only local, and does not affect the 'shared experience,' I consider this a mere minor glitch. If anything affects the shared experience it's bugs like this, where one person doesn't see the same as the next. It's not a firestorm issue as was pointed out before, I've seen it many times myself, often the same linksets, always in either the official viewer or Marine Kelley's RLV.

Nothing is going on with the import into SL. You probably set the import scale into 3ds max too big. other thread

I don't know if that's possible, although you can get the viewer to show the amount of triangles drawn somehow. I do wonder if any RL company is in any way interested in a build made with SL prims or sculpties. Just build your objects completely in mesh and you can see what the polycount or vertice count is before uploading. I think the count in SL wouldn't be of any value because sculpts can only be used in SL and are a polygon nightmare with over 2000 triangles. Even SL prims are more polygon heavy than the equivalent mesh object as far as I know for hollowing and other modifications. For example, an SL box is not 12 triangles but 108. Furthermore, a box is an object you're not likely to encounter in any video game to begin with. Who needs an invisible bottom?

No idea how to tackle the attachment issue, but I've experienced the physics bug aswell. That started months ago for me. No physics settings make any difference, even though the SL viewer will show the correct physics model (using the debug or advanced settings), I'll just walk or fall through it like you. (Usually?) the fix is it to drag a copy, for me that seems to work every time this bug occurs. Unfortunately, like someone recently pointed out, the test grid is a test grid for LL, not for the residents. As guinea pigs we can't expect anything at all to work on Aditi.