Your dream sculpty program?

While you are formalizing final thoughts, perhaps you should put a little thought into what you seem to be missing. And that is that up until now, all of these citizen "builders" that you speak of, have predominantly built SL with the in-world tools provided by the SL platform. So that many of these builders have contributed to the development of SL without the use of any of these outside programs you speak of. And now that LL has incorporated this sculpty creating feature that enhances the develpment of the SL grid, these builders would like to make use of this feature in an effort to continue contributing to the development of the SL grid. And that without the continued contribution of all of these builders the SL grid will be the worse off for it. And on and on ...

So get over yourself Sir.

You are a legend in your own mind only.

I disagree, somewhat.

Everyone can be taught to use Photoshop correctly, as can everyone be taught to sing in tune. It is all pure technique and skill. But to create something stunning, design beautiful clothing, and to sing so beautifully people shed tears - THIS is talent!

You are repeating my point.

Read carefully.

Regardless of your talent, you can not create that stunning sculpty design without training/skill in that sculpty creating tool.

You can not design those beautiful clothes without training/skill in fashion design or the use of photoshop, Paintshop etc.

You can not sing so beautiful people shed tears without some form of singing lessons/training.

In order to bring that talent into fruition, some type of training/skill in that talent must be undertaken in order to harness that talent and bring it forth in all its glory.

That's what I meant. I just misunderstood you.

I'm a little confused Cheyenne. If you agree that building is a skill that people need to learn (I disagree with your skill/talent distinctions, but that's beside the point right now) then why is it problematic for people to learn an external app rather than in-world tools? Especially considering some of the external apps people can choose from are free, so it's not like there's any cost barrier.

Bear in mind, any in-world sculpty tool will never be as good as existing external tools. I for one would much prefer LL spends its time working on grid stability and other issues which only they can take care of, rather than making a sub-par clone of existing tools.

Johan, thanks so much for attempting this. Unfortunately, I couldn't get it to work. I put the program into one of my already existing primscript texture folders, entered my login info and sim location, told it where to find the script (same folder), hit Run Process, and then nothing happened.

If you've got the time to take another stab at it, please do.

Thanks again.

No you don't put it into a folder with an exported prim script, you put it into the folder with the normal command line utility. My gui doesn't have any of the functionality of the uploader in it, it simply collects information and launches the command line app for you.

But again, I don't actually know if it works, I just think it does. Could you post an example of exactly what you would type in the command line (using a fake username and password obviously)? heh, I should really test this myself. I mean, I have Maya

Ok, that makes a lot more sense. I had been questioning the logic in having to move the program from folder to folder each time. Glad to hear I was just misinterpreting that part. Thanks for the explanation.

(Gonna go take my silly brain out back and slap it around a bit now for not being smart enough to have realized that in the first place)

Anyway, I've now put the program into the same folder with importprimscript.exe and its related files. I've entered the login and sim info, and told it where to find the .primscript file. Unfortunately though, it still doesn't seem to do anything.

If I'm understanding you correctly, when I hit Run Process, it should pop open a command line window and I should see the script start to run, right? That's not happening. Did I do something wrong again, or is it indeed just not working?

If it makes testing on your end any easier, I'd be happy to send you a folder with the .primscript file, maps, and textures for Maya-exported object.


EDIT: Here's the command line info you asked for.

importprimscript.exe Firstname Lastname password Simname 128 128 35 C:\projectfolder\project.primscript

Exactly. However, it looks like you missed my edit where I asked for an example of what exactly you type. I want to make sure that the parameters I'm typing in are correct.

Also, thanks for the offer of examples files to test, and I may take you up on it, but it looks like the wiki already has the ant example to try. What does it say about me that I'm willing to program this gui, but I'm lazy about downloading the example files and trying to use what I wrote?

EDIT: duh, I forgot to use the password when starting the command line app. Gimme 10 minutes to fix it and re-upload, then test it again.

My ultimate sculptie program would be MAYA if someone got off their asses and created a solid import/export application.

Maya is--in my professional opinion--the most powerful and efficient 3d application on the market. Yes, it isn't cheap, but in the software realm, nothing as extensive and mainstream as Maya is cheap.

Man...those of you who think highly of Blender need to delve into Maya or Max sometime...the differences are light-years apart.

Hehehe. Looks like I was responding to your edit via my own edit while you were typing this response to my lack of response. Fun stuff.

Here it is again, just for good measure:

importprimscript.exe Firstname Lastname password Simname 128 128 35 C:\projectfolder\project.primscript

Okay I just uploaded it again, with the password this time. Make sure to clear your browser's cache before downloading again.

Incidentally, make sure you are testing with a sim with a one word name. I forgot to do the quotes for two word names, I'll take care of that detail later.


It's a little utility for optimizing png files to make the filesize even smaller. So like, you save the image as png in Photoshop, then run PNG Crush on the file to optimize it. Not useful for SL, since you shouldn't be using png files.

Still not working for me. I push the button and nothing happens. Thanks for continuing to try on this.

EDIT: Actually, it did work this time. It didn't launch the command line window for me to see it locally, but when I logged in with the viewer, the object was waiting for me in-world. Thanks a bunch, Johan. I owe you a nice fruit basket or something.

heh that must've been amusing. "Darn, nothing happened. Oh well, I guess I'll log in... Hey!"

Could you download it one more time and test? I put in a couple popup messages, and quotes for sim names with more than 1 word. Try running it without filling in all the text fields to make sure it gives the error message, and then test on both a 1 word sim and a multiple word sim to see if it works in both cases. I just wanna make sure it works in all situations before I call this little addon finished.

The concept that people can/should learn an external app rather than make use of in-world tools is understood. And like any life endeavor, those with the required ambition and determination will eventually acquire the necessary skill to accomplish this goal. So that the point is not that it is difficult to understand that people can/should learn an outside app to accomplish this goal. The point is that we are in the initial stages of the implementation of this feature, and not many residents, talented or not, have yet to acquire this training/skill. For many of us, the learning curve is steep at this stage of the implementation process. Given no other choice, of course the only alternative of having to invest time and effort into learning what we have will have to do. But if there is an alternative, now would be the time to explore that option.

From an users perspective, such as yourself and other like-minded folk on this forum, this may not be and important issue to understand or rally behind. From LL's perspective, who are more interested in having a product that is recognized for ease-of-use, and that appeals to the masses thereby ensuring a continued increase in its user-base, it is a very important issue. Indeed, its very future and success may well depend on it.



This is what we are now discussing. The introduction of a more user-friendly alternative, if possible , would be great. If that is not possible, or even feasible, then so be it.

Such is life.

As a Blender user who has never tried Maya or 3DS Max, I am curious exactly what it is that they offer that Blender does not. I have not seen anything in the actual shapes that is different, in fact Blender seems to give more control over shapes and exporting than Maya or Max, judging by some of the questions that pop up around here.

So, I am assuming that they do something with textures that Blender does not. I have spent some time examining other peoples work, and the only thing that I have noticed is that it that Maya and Max will bake specularity onto textures? I dont even know if they do specularity or not, I could be mistaken.

I understand that Maya and Max both have additional capabilities that would be useful for professional movie and video game development, but sculpted prims arnt exactly cutting edge. Its not like a super advanced SSS algorithm is really going to make much difference when your using 512x512 textures and arnt even rendering it for the observers POV.

I have been tempted to save up and buy a copy of Maya, but I have so far been able to find no reason (beyond specularity baking?) to do it. Even with the specularity thing, it sounds like my work flow would be no faster. I can either spend my time air brushing on shiny, or I can spend my time fighting with the exporter and menus.

So what is it that I am missing here?

I am both Maya and 3dsMax user and prefer Maya over 3dsMax......another econimical tool similar to how Maya uses its keymapping is AC3D....I think the people working on AC3D are doing a fantasitc job in adding support for Second Life..

I really prefer Maya, but the problem is the lack of excellent Sculpty tools..for example, I use Maya 8 and some of the Mel scripts does not support Maya 8 and/or are buggy or hard to use.

On the other hand, the In-World Editor is unique and powerful BUT needs more features for better modeling..

If I were to choose between 3dsMax, Maya, and the In-World Editor I would choose the In-World editor and would really want to see that editor improve. For me its best to use one editor and not many....

Personally, I think he overstated the differences slightly. It's not so much that the specific features on offer are so much better or whatever, just that everything is presented in a much more sensible way, and promotes the artistic process better. Ultimately, if you haven't tried it yet then I would suggest trying Maya, but if you have tried both and don't see any reason to switch, then don't. I have tried most of the softwares mentioned in this thread and my opinion is thus, but this is just my opinion: I use Maya mostly, I teach classes in 3ds max but don't use it in my own work, I often use Wings for box modeling specific objects to bring into Maya for further work, I never use Blender.

It's sort of like GIMP and Photoshop; they offer pretty much the same tools, but the overarching design is very different. I can't really point to any specific advantages, so if you've tried both and prefer GIMP then keep using that. However, I do not personally know anyone who has tried both and prefers GIMP, whereas I know many people (myself included) who've tried both and prefer Photoshop.

There are far too many things to list, obviously, but one that comes to mind right away for me is that Blender's implementation of NURBS is atrocious. This, I assume, is why sculpty modeling in Blender tends to be done with polygons instead of NURBS.


I'd agree with this only so far as to say a polygon is a polygon, no matter what program creates it. Just as a single pixel coming out of Photoshop can't be any different from a single pixel coming out of, say, MS Paint, a single polygon coming out of Maya cannot be any different than a single polygon coming out of Blender.

The difference lies not in the actual shapes themselves, but in the tools for manipulating and using them. The same is true with all tools, really. The ancient Egyptians created amazing stoneworks with nothing more than hammer stones and copper chisels. The same thing could be done today, but nobody does that. We now have steel tools and machines that make the same quality of work achievable in much less time. Also the modern tools allow us to do things with other materials besides just stone that the Egyptians could never have dreamed of.

Blender, to me, is the copper chisel of the 3D modeling world. In the hands of a skilled user, it can create all kinds of things. It will never do the work as efficiently or as easily as Maya or Max will though, and it's not equipped to do many of the things that those programs are able to do routinely.

It's not that Blender's bad. It's incredibly powerful for a free application. It's just not fair to compare it with the likes of Maya or Max. They're really in different leagues.


Don't let the questions fool you. It's not that Blender offers more control; it's simply that it offers less options. If you were handed a 32-piece cutlery set, and asked to prepare a meal with it, you might have a few questions about which tool to use for which job. If you were handed just a paring knife though, you'd have a lot less questions, but you also wouldn't be able to do as much.



Among other things, sure.


With a good render pipeline, anything can be baked onto anything. You can certainly bake specular highlights onto textures in both Maya and Max. They both come with renderers capable of that task, and there are also lots of additional third party (better) renderers available for both programs.

What Blender's native rendering capabilities are, I'm afraid I don't know. I'd be really surprised if it can't bake specular highlights at all.


First, video game textures are typically 256x256 or smaller. All the same video memory constraints apply to games as apply to SL. So I'm not really sure what you mean by implying that it's somehow ok for 512x512's (or any other size) in SL to be baked using lesser technology than what's used for baked textures for games.

Second, if by SSS, you mean sub-surface scattering, you'd actually be really surprised what a difference that can make for your sculpties. Sure, the simulation won't respond to the observer's point of view, but that's what happens when you bake. EVERYTHING becomes fixed in place. That doesn't mean it won't still look really good. Until SL (and video processing in general) gets to the point where things like sub-surface scattering are practical in real time, baking is gonna have to do as the next best thing. It makes no difference whether we're talking about SL or games.


Save your money for now. Download the learning edition of Maya for free, and learn first hand what it can do. It won't be usable for sculpties since all your renderings (including sculpt maps) will be watermarked, but you'll be able to do everything else.


The Maya exporter is actually orders of magnitude simpler than the method used for Blender (unless the Blender method has been simplified since that first tutorial appeared a few months ago). You just install the script once. After that, all you need to do to export a sculpt map is press one button. I'm not sure why you think there's any "fighting" involved there.

And that's just for starters. Once you get past the fact that you're already used to Blender, so anything new will seem uncomfortably different, I'm sure you'll find that a lot of the techniques you've been using to get results in Blender are actually way more complicated than what you could do to get the same (or better) results in Maya. Again, it's not that Blender can't do the job; it's just that its interface is designed by programmers, not by artists. Maya has some much friendlier tools.


Besides everything I just said? Probably plenty. The only way really to know what you're missing is to go ahead and dive in. Download Maya PLE (which, I repeat, is free) and make a concerted effort to learn the program. I don't think you'll be disappointed. You might be frustrated at first over the differences from what you already know, but in the end, it'll be hard to deny that Maya is much easier to use than Blender when you compare the two objectively, not to mention WAY more powerful.

Believe me, I'd love it if it were the other way around. $2000 vs. free; if free works even half as well, I'll take free. There's a reason why the $2000 is worth it.

That having been said, if all you're ever gonna do is sculpties, and you're not making them professionally, your definition of "worth it" might be different from mine. If it is, that's fine. At least you'll know what the difference between the programs actually is, and you can make an educated judgment from there.

Actually, LL is interested in having a product that appealed to the people with the venture capital to support it, corporations. They came, they wanted this. The builders wanted it, it arrived. As for the future depending on ease of use, I don't think so. It will depend on stability first then easy second. Easy to join, easy to interact. easy to find people and have fun. Yes.
Easy to build? Never.

Well said, Thunderclap. I think it's important to understand that those of us who are in SL now are not at all representative of the general public. 90% of people who join SL leave and never come back. Those of us who didn't quit are pretty weird, or maybe unusual would be a friendlier word. The things we want are not what most people want.

As I've said several times now, if SL is every to be the next Internet, its relative focus on content creation will have to be way less than it it is now. When the Internet was brand new, most of its users were those who were creating content, but those people were few and far between. Nowadays, almost everyone uses the Internet, but most don't actively create any content for it. The future of SL will have to follow that same pattern. As it gets bigger, the majority of users will not be like us. They won't have any interest in creating content at all.

Therefore, it only makes sense that SL's internal development be focused on things other than content creation. As much as we'd all love a magical do-it-all viewer that could take the place of every third party application we're all using for making sculpties, textures, animations, and everything else, that's really not a practical idea.

No one expects a web browser to be able to make websites. By the same token, we shouldn't expect the SL viewer to make every last piece of SL content. Websites are made in much more complicated programs like Dreamweaver, Flash, Cold Fusion, etc., just as high end content for SL has always been made in Photoshop, Poser, and now Maya and other 3D applications.

The future really should be about incorporating MORE 3rd party applications for content creation, not less. Those who want the viewer to do it all should more carefully consider the implications of that desire. Think about it this way. Would you rather have just the small percentage of unusual people that we have now as your customer base, or would you rather have the whole of humanity?

If your answer is the latter (which it should be), then you should want the viewer to be as simple as it can possibly be. Make the investment in yourself to learn any and all necessary third party tools, and stop wishing for the viewer to get more complicated. You want your future customers to have as easy a time as possible. You don't want them to be so intimidated by the viewer that they just give up and leave SL before they ever get to buy your products (which is how it is now for most people).

Read that carefully and dissect it.

You were briefly on the right track, and then you jumped off and headed into the unimaginative, visionless track that inhibits innovation. To understand change, one must be capable of abandoning current SOP's, be forward thinking, and be able to think outside the box.

It is true, as you mention above, that when the internet was brand new, most of its users were those who created content, but those people were few and far between. But nowadays, almost everyone uses the internet.

It is also true that at that time the internet was DOS based and every action required a DOS command to execute. The reason that no one took to it was because it was not user-friendly, difficult to learn and naviagate, discouraging its wide use and participation. The handful of techincal users of the time however, found comfort in it, swore by it, and saw no need for change.

Sound familiar?

Then a funny thing happened.

Suddenly, out of nowhere an innovative and forward thinking young man, gifted with forward vision and out-of-the-box thinking, came up with a computer system called Windows.

It was the introduction of this innovative, user-friendly, windows based computer operating system that blew the lid off the internet and allowed almost everyone to use the internet today, in ways then unimaginable.

Do you for a minute believe that had we followed those handful of technical minded DOS based computer technicians and remained content with that DOS based operating system, we would have progressed and achieved the level of computer usage and technology we have today?

Do you see a correlation?

No one is asking to have Maya incorporated into the SL infrastructure. As has already been established, Maya is capable of doing a lot more than sculpty creation. We don't need all of the bells and whistles of a Maya to be incorporated into the grid. We just need those tools specific to sculpty creation to be incorporated. And even then, they don't have to be of the detailed, high quality variety. A tool capable of creating sculpty objects of reasonable quality would suffice. Those interested in more complicated creations can of course resort to the more weighty and complicated outside programs.

Someone earlier in the thread mentioned something about a set of sculpty pre-selected shapes, much like the prim shapes already in the SL tools, that when rezzed in world could be made to stretch/pulled in different directions to create that desired sculpty shape. Or when linked together, combined to create that desired sculpty shape. This is an example of the "yes we can" forward thinking we need. Not this "we can't do it" because whatever. Personally, I have always despised the "I can't do it" mentality.

But I will lay the subject to rest. As it is painfully obvious that there are none, in the mold of Bill Gates, to be found in these here parts.

Oh, and BTW ...



Never, ever, say never.

Cheyenne, I think you completely missed my meaning. When I said "when the Internet was brand new", I was talking about the early to mid 90's. Netscape and Internet Explorer first hit the market in 1994 and 1995, respectively. At that time, very few people had any interest in, or even much awareness of, this newfangled "Internet" thing. Most people who used it then were people who were just those who were creating content for it. It wasn't until several years later that the general public at large caught on.

In any case, I'm not sure where you're getting your sense of history from. Windows had been in existence for more than a decade before the time period I'm talking about. In no way did its birth "blow the lid off the Internet." If anything, it was the other way around. The Intenet blew the lid off Windows. It was, after all, the advent of E-mail and browsing that turned the majority of the world into regular computer users, not any particular operating system.


Probably not, but your analogy is flawed. The difference between DOS and Windows is about a thousand times more extreme than the difference between using one program to create content and another to view it.

To continue my Internet analogy, which I think is a lot more suitable, here's how things break down today. The majority of Internet users in the world, as I said earlier, are not in the business of creating content. They simply use a browser to view and interact with content made by others. Those "others" are the relatively small minority of people who know how to use more complicated authoring programs, applications designed specifically for creating content instead of just viewing it.

Let me turn your question around, and put it to you like this. Do you for a minute believe that if browsers had included all the complicated web authoring tools that programs like Dreamweaver and Cold Fusion contain, that the public at large ever would have started using the Internet to anywhere near the degree to which they do today? I certainly don't.

It's the same thing with SL. As long as the viewer's focus remains on content creation, the vast majority of people will never be very likely to get on board with it. The fact that 9 out of 10 people even now choose not to stick around after logging in for the first time is proof enough that the current model just isn't suited for the masses. People like simple things. Over-complicate it, and most people will just walk away.


With the way you put it? No.


Actually, lots of us are asking for exactly that. There are tons of things that Maya and other full-fledged 3D modeling programs can do that would be tremendously beneficial for SL. Sooner or later, SL will evolve to include many of those things. There's simply no way the viewer will ever be able to do everything.

Again, the viewer is basically the equivalent of a browser. That's really all it needs to be. Browsers can create simple content (like the kind you and I are typing into this forum right now), but for anything more complex, you need a program dedicated to creation instead of viewing.


Of course not, but there are a great many things that SL could stand to improve on in terms of 3D geometry and visual quality. As more and more of those improvements trickle in (and the will), the less likely it will be that the viewer will be able to keep incorporating tools to take advantage of them when creating new content. Sooner or later, that task will have to fall upon external tools. Again, there's just no way one program will be able to do everything. It would be silly to try.

Look, it's always been the case that most content in SL is created externally. All textures, animations, sounds, and videos have to be made in outside programs. So why is it such a big deal to you that sculpties are also on that list?


No, we don't. Some people would like to have them incorporated, sure, but no one NEEDS them to be.


I don't think anyone has said "we can't do it", and I think you're sadly missing the boat if you think you're the only one who's being forward thinking here. I would say that everyone in this discussion has been VERY forward thinking. It's just that people differ on the best ways to procede. You'd do well to recognize that, rather than assume that just because someone disagrees with you, they're not being progressive.

If in your mind, adding an in-word sculpting tool is somehow more forward-thinking than everything I've said about what will most successfully bring the masses to SL, then I guess all I can say from here is that we have different definitions of what "forward" actually means. To me, the most progressice thing we could possibly to would be to make SL simple enough to use that EVERYONE will easily get involved with it.

Don't get me wrong; it's not that I think the presence of such a tool would make ore break anything. It's just the line has to be drawn somewhere, whether by intention or out of sheer practicality. The more types of content SL is able to utilize, the more content will need to be made in dedicated external programs. That's just simple logic. Once again, there's no way a single viewer will ever be able to do it all.

Just imagine for a minute that I'm right about all this. What would be the inevitable conclusion, software wise, if SL really were to become the next Internet? First, different companies would start making competing viewers for SL, just as different companies currently make competing web browsers now. This is already starting to happen.

Second, companies will start making SL-specific programs dedicated for making content, just as they make web authoring programs now. One day, you'll be able to go to your local Office Max or CompUSA and buy Dreamweaver For Second Life, or Maya Online, or something to that effect, which would a program capable of connecting to the grid and making all kinds of advanced content for it. (And of course there will always be the open source competitors in case you don't want to spend money at the store.)

Wouldn't all that be a whole lot cooler than just having some rudimentary sculpt editor in the viewer? Well in order for that to happen, SL has to go main stream. And in order for that to happen, the viewer has to get simpler, not more complicated.


If I can make it through life without ever being described as fitting "in the mold of Bill Gates", I think I'll consider that a good thing. No offense, Bill, if you happen to read this. I'd just rather be me.

Wow, this thread went sideways quickly..

There's a lot of misinformation here now. Most glaring is the comment that "Windows came out of nowhere". Might want to read up on Gary Kildall and other real pioneers such as the GUI work done at Rank Xerox which led the way..

As far as comparisons to Blender and other 3D applications, each has strengths and weaknesses. Yeah Maya is ahead in Nurbs, but Blender is ahead in UV unwrapping and things like fluid simulations. There's a fair chance that Blender 2.50 will take Blender ahead in hair and fur too. So comparisions aren't totally unreasonable to do. I wonder what a typical group of 13-15 years olds could do with Maya in 20 hours?

http://www.blendernation.com/2007/07/16/red-hat-high-2007/

That would be an interesting comparison

Hi Chosen,

I think the internet (web) is actually evolving to the point where more and more users are actually creating content. The whole "Web 2.0" thing, if you will. Five years ago, nobody was creating blogs, wikis, facebook pages, Myspace pages, YouTube videos, etc. Now, although it's still probably a relatively small percentage of total web pages, all of this "user created content" is in some ways transforming the web into a more collaborative environment. And this is possible because there are now very simple tools for creating this content. You no longer have to be a web designer to create content. I create content with my browser.

I see a parallel with SL. I was the person who advocated the inclusion of a set of sculpty shapes in SL that could easily be manipulated with a simple, useful in-world sculpty editor. I guess I don't see that as a very big change from normal prim creation/manipulation, more just a logical extension of existing tools. If the building tools that exist in SL now were not there at the start, I think SL would be a very very different place. If you had to go to Maya (or Blender or whatever) to create any content in SL, I think there would be far far less content there. Now the skilled builders might argue that that would be a good thing (less amateur junk), but that's not what SL seems to be really about.

If it's My World, My Imagination, I've got to be able to create My World. If it's not easy to create content, then I'm dependent on others to build My World.

I'm not sure that's the way SL was envisioned.

Good discussion,

Doug Danforth