|
Drongle McMahon
Older than he looks
Join date: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 494
|
04-30-2009 17:35
From: Five Denver Try comparing how long it takes to rez a 128x128 lossy sculptmap with a 64x64 lossless sculptmap. You'll be surprised!.
Obviously you do lose some quality with a lossy sculptmap. But if you're working with organic forms then it's barely noticable. Now if you're making a sharp edged object then I would recommend continuing to use lossless 64x64 sculptmaps. I have no argument with that. I only do sharp edges. My guess it's all to do with download priority settings. There was a viewer where they made the lossless sculptmaps real fast, but they reverted it for some (intensly annoying) reason. |
|
Five Denver
Registered User
Join date: 21 Apr 2009
Posts: 101
|
04-30-2009 17:48
From: Drongle McMahon I have no argument with that. I only do sharp edges. My guess it's all to do with download priority settings. There was a viewer where they made the lossless sculptmaps real fast, but they reverted it for some (intensly annoying) reason. My theory is that the lossless textures are still bugged. LL really struggled getting them to work for quite some time. It was a cache related bug that was causing them to download and then get stuck in the texture cache. I think a Linden eventually hacked in a timer to force sculptmaps to load from cache after 25 seconds or so. I could be wrong though. I've no hard evidence of this at all. But it does seem strange that a little 64x64 sculptmap can sometimes take as long 25 seconds to rez. |
|
Ephraim Kappler
Reprobate
Join date: 9 Jul 2007
Posts: 1,946
|
04-30-2009 23:37
From: Five Denver The actual sculptmap texture is under the same restrictions as regular textures. Well I learn something new every day. Still, I haven't noticed lossless little 64 meshes taking an unusually long time to load. However, I should say that I'm not at all experienced with making sculpties. I'm currently working on my first organic shape, a boot, and I am restricted to 64 meshes since I use Sculpt Studio so it will be interesting to see the final result. I did once make the mistake of uploading a 128 x128 profile pic with the lossless option clicked and it took maybe as much as ten minutes to load in the profile tab despite my having a fairly good connection. |
|
Void Singer
Int vSelf = Sing(void);
Join date: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 6,973
|
05-01-2009 09:53
From: Chosen Few Actually, I'd rather see a sliding scale, to encourage texture sheeting. me too, I was just generalizing. as long as all 4 textures are used within draw distance it's definitely a bonus all around... I'd argue for even within the same sim/locale
_____________________
| | . "Cat-Like Typing Detected" | . This post may contain errors in logic, spelling, and | . grammar known to the SL populace to cause confusion | | - Please Use PHP tags when posting scripts/code, Thanks. | - Can't See PHP or URL Tags Correctly? Check Out This Link... | - 
|
|
Gordon Wendt
404 - User not found
Join date: 10 May 2006
Posts: 1,024
|
05-01-2009 12:42
From: Drongle McMahon I have no argument with that. I only do sharp edges. My guess it's all to do with download priority settings. There was a viewer where they made the lossless sculptmaps real fast, but they reverted it for some (intensly annoying) reason. If I remember correctly it was because to make them rez that quickly they had to give them priority over everything else so while the sculpties rezzed quickly nothing else did until they were done which became especially problematic if you got hit with the ever present hanging texture bug which pretty much stopped everything in it's tracks.
_____________________
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/GWendt Plurk: http://www.plurk.com/GordonWendt GW Designs: XStreetSL
|
|
Gordon Wendt
404 - User not found
Join date: 10 May 2006
Posts: 1,024
|
05-01-2009 12:46
I'm all in favor of variable pricing as long as it isn't ridiculous, 64x64 should be like 5L, 128x128 should be 7 and 256x256 should be at the current price of 10 and then scale up from there. Lossless should be slightly more expensive per size than their non lossless counterparts.
_____________________
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/GWendt Plurk: http://www.plurk.com/GordonWendt GW Designs: XStreetSL
|
|
Nae Mayo
Registered User
Join date: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 228
|
05-02-2009 10:37
From: Gordon Wendt I'm all in favor of variable pricing as long as it isn't ridiculous, 64x64 should be like 5L, 128x128 should be 7 and 256x256 should be at the current price of 10 and then scale up from there. Lossless should be slightly more expensive per size than their non lossless counterparts. Do you think LL implement that to reduce their revenue? I think it will probably be L10 for 64x64. The rest higher price. /me sigh So many uncertainty in SL development for 2009. How many can survive? How many newbie will stay? |