Solution We Can ALL Be Happy With

[Cathy Foil]

I have come up with a plan that should make the Collision Bone supporters happy, the Mesh Deformer supporters happy and most of all Linden Lab happy.  It's a WIN, WIN, WIN!

Make the Collision Bone deformer the default deformer in all viewers.  In the preference menu of all viewers make the Mesh Deformer a graphics option.  This way those on slower computers have the option of not using the Mesh Deformer which should satisfy Linden Labs concerns about performance.

What clothing designers would do is skin and weight to the Collision Bones it is a smart move.  If a customer who buys mesh clothing prefers the Mesh Deformer they can turn on the deformer in their graphics settings.  The Mesh Deformer does already work with mesh weighted to the Collision Bones.

Content creators will still have the option to upload their mesh as Mesh Deformer mesh or not so those who just want to use the Collision Bones and not have their mesh effected by the Mesh Deformer can.

Changes need to be made to the Collision Bones in order to make weighting to them easier and to work with the Mesh Deformer even better.  Part of the problem with the original Collision Bones is that they are offset from the normal bones, are at different rotations and have XYZ scales not set to X=1, Y=1 and Z=1.  I would suggest instead of moving the old Collision Bones and changing their rotations and scale, because the would mess up the Collision Skeleton used in calculating avatar collisions, I would simply add more collision bones one for each regular bone.  Make the new Collision Bones match up the existing regular bones so they are identical to the normal bones in XYZ coordinates, rotations and scale.

It would be great but not totally necessary if when the Mesh Deformer was activated, in someone's graphics preference settings, that changes in the XYZ scale of the Collision Bones was set not to effect mesh uploaded as Mesh Deformer mesh.

Maintenance of the Mesh Deformer could be left up to third party volunteers so the burden and costs can be taken off Linden Labs shoulders.

It is a WIN, WIN, WIN scenario.  Best of all Linden Lab will be seen as a company who listens to the concerns and needs of its customers and content creators.  Everyone gets what they want.

Please supporters of both Deformers please post a message of support for this plan so Linden Labs sees us as a group of content creators and mesh buyers who want this.  Post even if all you say is you are for this solution.

[Pussycat Catnap]

That blows up shared experience - its the same reason they had to kill the Emerald style multi-attach system.

And it doesn't address the performance issue, because its not seeing where that issue is driven from...

It complicates the issue for mesh modellers which would now have to support two incompatible systems in each mesh item.

And it complicates it for buyers who have to make choices between various options...

It further complicates it for LLs because they have to keep code and the avatar viable for two different solutions to address one issue, and make sure they have code in place to prevent confusion and cross-contamination... they actually have to build 3 systems: one for deformer, one for collision, and one for when an item has both flags set (or they prevent this option)...

- and that slows down development.

 

[Cathy Foil]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

That blows up shared experience - its the same reason they had to kill the Emerald style multi-attach system.

Cathy Foil's response: No it doesn't blow up the shared experience.  The mesh deformer is viewer side so only the person who has the Mesh Deformer turned on sees the different deformation the Mesh Deformer will make.  Right now one person can have the sun set to noon while another is set to Midnight.  That is a much much bigger difference in shared experience.

And it doesn't address the performance issue, because its not seeing where that issue is driven from...

Cathy Foil's response: Can you not read?  Those on slower computers do not have to turn on the Mesh Deformer so there is no performance issue.  Those who leave it off will simply see the mesh deform according to the Collision Bone deformer.  The individual SL resident gets to decide if they want to take the small performance hit just as they do now with many other graphic settings.

It complicates the issue for mesh modellers which would now have to support two incompatible systems in each mesh item.

Cathy Foil's response: It does not complicate the issue for mesh creators.  The only thing they have to do to make mesh clothing work with the Mesh Deformer is select two options in the upload window.    I think content creators can handle that.  They are not incompatible.

And it complicates it for buyers who have to make choices between various options...

Cathy Foil's response:  It does not complicate things for buyers.  They buy a piece of mesh clothing wear it.  The default is Collision Bones deformation.  If they like what they see great!  If they are not quite happy they go into their preferences and under graphics turn on the Mesh Deformer.  All a clothing Designer has to do is in their description say that this item is both Collision Bone and Mesh Deformer enabled.  There will be clothing designers who do not wish to make their clothes deformer enabled at all and that is their choice.  According to your type logic just having a Deformer will complicate things for buyers too much.  Besides since when is it a bad thing for customers to have options?

It further complicates it for LLs because they have to keep code and the avatar viable for two different solutions to address one issue, and make sure they have code in place to prevent confusion and cross-contamination... they actually have to build 3 systems: one for deformer, one for collision, and one for when an item has both flags set (or they prevent this option)...

Cathy Foil's response: The Mesh Deformer can easily work with any avatar LL decides to create for SL.  In fact it is probably easier to make  a new avatar and just use the Mesh Deformer than it is to setup a new avatar with all new Collision Bones.  There is no cross-contamination between the Mesh Deformer and Collision Bones.  They work in completely different ways.  I have used mesh weighted to Collision Bones and uploaded it as Mesh Deformer mesh and it worked just fine.  The way the Mesh Deformer works is it doesn't care what bone a mesh is weighted to.  It doesn't look at the bone so there is no cross-contamination.

- and that slows down development.

Cathy Foil's response: The Mesh Deformer is done and ready to be added all viewers so no slow down there.  The Collision Bone system already exists.  It just needs some fine tuning to make it easier use.  The upload window will be the same window the Mesh Deformer Viewer uses right now so it doesn't need to change.  Only thing that needs to happen is an on off switch in the preference graphics window for the Mesh Deformer.  It would be nice if once on any Mesh Deformer mesh not be affected by changes in the scales of the Collision Bones but that isn't completely necessary.  We waited two years.  I think we can wait another month or two to fine tune the Collision Bones and add an on off switch.

 

---

 

[Medhue Simoni]

Personally, I think LL went way overboard when they attempted to control 3rd party viewers. If this had not happened, we'd not be dealing with any of this over the past 2 years, and we'd of had a system for mesh clothing that was fully tested. Instead, we have painstakingly waited, and dealt with countless misconceptions, and complete BS over the mesh deformer. Even 2 years afters it started, we have people still barfing up their "Theories" about how the deformer works, instead of actually knowing and making something with it. Even this "Theory" of the mesh deformer creating lag, is total BS at this point, as it has not been fully tested on a mass scale.

Should we have 1 code to rule the meshes, like LL wants 1 TOS to rule the IPs? That can't really be determined, if all available sources are handcuffed. As far as the residents, it would not even be noticed by them, unless 1 of the solutions was purposely broken. They would just get the mesh and it works, why is not something they would care about at all.

Do I think we should have 2 solutions? That is a difficult question because I see no avenue to this. LL is never going to implement both. They sat on 1 for 2 years, so implementing it now after their announcement seems out of the question. Personally, I think LL's choice to control things is unwise. If they did not try to control things, 3rd Party viewers would have the freedom to take the chances that LL won't. The best solutions would become very obvious over time. LL already forced creators into a system where they had to do obscene amounts of work for a very bad solutions, that was Standard sizing. So, any talk or claims of LL, or any1 else, that anybody is thinking of the creators is total BS. Nobody has been thinking about creators from the start, accept those who actually helped and supported the real solutions. Notice that LL was not involved at all, until a few days ago.

Now, Inworldz decisions from here should be interesting. They already implemented the mesh deformer. Will they also implement the collision bone solution? It will be interesting to see. I think they might have to if the creators scream for it. I'm not saying it's a bad place to be in for Inworldz, just that it will be interesting.

[Nalates Urriah]

Cathy, you seem to have missed the whole shared experience point.

If I wear a Deformer item and my friend wears a Fitted item then those people that have Deformer enabled will see me wearing clothes that fit and my friends not fitting. Those that have Fitted enabled will see my friend's clothes fitting and mine not fitting. That means anyone that does not enable both will see some degree of oddity in mine and my friends clothes.

If both systems were implemented there would always be some number of people wearing one or the other. People with only one of the processes enables would always see some poorly fitting clothes. It would be like a person using a non-mesh capable viewer and seeing mesh as spheres.

Setting the sun to different setting only affects my view of SL. My changing the viewer's sun settings does not affect your preception of SL. But, my wearing clothes made of Deformer or Fitted mesh does affect what you will see. That I can do something that makes things look different to different people is what the Lab defines as breaking the shared experience.

Adding both processes is going to add complications to the viewer and the market place. It will also increase the learning curve for using SL. Those are things the Lab strongly opposes. Your thinking the Lab would go for a plan like yours does not fit the reality of the Lab's goals.

[Cathy Foil]

---

Nalates Urriah wrote:

Cathy, you seem to have missed the whole shared experience point.

Cathy Foils Response: On I understand the concept of shared experience just fine.  I simply don't agree with it since everyone already has so much access to so many different graphics features that already make it so easy for us not to share the same experience.  The day night settings was just one example.  What about impostors

avatar settings

?  The difference between an image of that avatar imposter and the real 3D avatar is huge!  Way more than any differences that would show up between turning on or off the Mesh Deformer.

If I wear a Deformer item and my friend wears a Fitted item then those people that have Deformer enabled will see me wearing clothes that fit and my friends not fitting. Those that have Fitted enabled will see my friend's clothes fitting and mine not fitting. That means anyone that does not enable both will see some degree of oddity in mine and my friends clothes.

Cathy Foils Response:  One it is up to the content creator to decide if a mesh will be affected by both deformers.  So the content creator will make sure their mesh clothing looks decent and fit no matter what deformer is being used.  There will be content creators who don't want either deformer to affect their mesh.  

If both systems were implemented there would always be some number of people wearing one or the other. People with only one of the processes enables would always see some poorly fitting clothes. It would be like a person using a non-mesh capable viewer and seeing mesh as spheres.

Cathy Foils Response:  Again if a content creator doesn't like the way their mesh looks when the Mesh Deformer is enabled they just don't upload them as Mesh Deformer enabled mesh so even if someone turn on the Mesh Deformer in their preferences it won't affect the mesh.  You seem to think that poorly fitting clothes is an inevitable conclusion but it simply isn't.

Setting the sun to different setting only affects my view of SL. My changing the viewer's sun settings does not affect your perception of SL. But, my wearing clothes made of Deformer or Fitted mesh does affect what you will see. That

I

can do something

that makes things look different to different people is what the Lab defines as breaking the shared experience.

Cathy Foils Response:  OK you are making my head hurt because you logic is faulty.  We each can already make other peoples avatars look vastly different than the other person intended.  It is not a deform or which deformer or no deformer issue.  We all have the ability right now in our graphics settings to turn up or down on or off such things as mesh object detail, flexiprims, glow, shine, hardware skinning, lights and impostor avatars.  All of these dramatically change what the avatars look like. 

If you don't want someone else to be able to turn on the Mesh Deformer setting in their graphic settings and see your avatar differently than you would like the answer is simple.  Don't buy mesh clothing that is Mesh Deformer enabled.  Buy only fitted mesh.  

Adding both processes is going to add complications to the viewer and the market place. It will also increase the learning curve for using SL. Those are things the Lab strongly opposes. Your thinking the Lab would go for a plan like yours does not fit the reality of the Lab's goals.

Cathy Foils Response:  The Mesh Deformer is done.  It has basically been done for two years.  It satisfied all the criteria and goals that were originally set forth.  LL decided to complicate things instead of just implementing the Mesh Deformer.  Yes it will complicate things in the market place but so did skins, sculpties, mesh materials, prim hair, prim feet and I could go on and on.  I don't think adding a few more choices is adding too much.

Yes the learning curve would increase a bit.   Just having any deformer will increase the learning curve.  The learning curve increases every time you add a new feature or ability just as sculpties did and mesh did and materials did.

I think if someone is smart enough to learn how to make mesh clothing they can handle two deformers.  Some may decide to just stick with one.  Others both and still others none.

If LL is just now concerned that all this is overwhelming new residents with choices they missed the boat on that one about 8 or 9 years ago.

I have always thought that there should be a Prim Only Grid.  Sort of a SL Lite version for beginners.  Higher some of the best builders in SL to create 10 or 15 awesome sims that are super low lag and a simplified viewer.  Have some sort of game or contest or goals for new players to achieve rewarding them with cool items.  Then when they are done they will more than likely want to explore the bigger more complex world that is SL.

By no means am I saying that this Prim Only Grid experience be a requirement to gain access to SL.

 

---

 

[Melissa Yeuxdoux]

LL gets to decide what's "shared experience" at their whim. You're right; two avatars standing side by side can have widely differing graphics settings, draw distance, Windlight settings, and perceived position of the sun/moon, but that is deemed not to be a "shared experience" issue, while the mesh deformer is. At least with some third-party viewers I can choose not to render selected objects, so I can see or photograph the Eiffel Tower without all the stores cluttering its base while someone standing next to me does see them... but at least so far, LL doesn't consider that a "shared experience" issue.

[Cathy Foil]

---

Melissa Yeuxdoux wrote:

 but that is deemed not to be a "shared experience" issue, while the mesh deformer is.

---

I agree with most of what you are saying Melissa except LL hasn't declared that two residents seeing two slightly different deformations on the same mesh as breaking the "shared experience" rule.