These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
particles getting clipped too soon |
|
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
02-19-2006 01:32
Why are particles getting clipped too soon from view? If the camera is more than 20m away from the emitter, the .1-size particles are clipped (and .2-size ones are clipped at 40m). Why? This kills the effect in particle EFFECTS!
|
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
02-19-2006 15:04
From SL Answers post (where it is SO stupid we can't reply!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!):
The distance from where the particles can be seen depend on the size they are emminating from. Particles are a property of the prim. So when you can't see the object in your viewer, you won't see the particles. But that's just IT; I CAN still see the emitter object yet the particles are still disappearing based on their size! |
Torley Linden
Enlightenment!
![]() Join date: 15 Sep 2004
Posts: 16,530
|
02-19-2006 16:41
Eep, there are plenty of places to reply... like right here. I think I know what you're talking about but if you have more piccies, videos, etc. please post--and send a bug report in so LL QA can get this verified for sure.
![]() Also, anyone else noticing the same--please post here! Put this discussion forum to good use! ^_~ _____________________
|
Cottonteil Muromachi
Abominable
![]() Join date: 2 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,071
|
02-19-2006 16:55
Check if there are other particle emitters around. The client sometimes gives priority to other larger emitters and may cull the one you're looking at.
|
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
02-19-2006 17:09
But the chances that a Linden will post in other forums is slight, at best. You are an exception though, but shouldn't be the ONLY exception. It's just annoying having to repost my question to a forum I CAN reply to when Second Life Answers should be replyable by, at least, the original poster. Otherwise posts there are 1-sided and, usually, incomplete.
Anyway, there's not really any pic I could send that would illustrate this since it's hard to tell with a static image. You just need to put a particle script in am invisible 10m³ prim and set the particle size to, say, .1m. Then, once the particle system is running (duh), zoom the camera in and out and watch the particles disappear/reappear about 20m away. The smaller the particles, the closer they'll disappear/reappear and the larger the particles, the farther they'll disappear/reappear. On further investigation, there are other particle disappearance issues too. I set a test particle script that emits a static (dropped) 4m particle for 1 second and it disappears 20m away on a single, unlinked .5m³ emitter prim (27m away on a .01m³ prim). Now, I have my visibility ("draw distance" ![]() I have smoke particles from a torch and chimney (both linked objects if that matters) in my smurf village that are rendered even from at least 45m away! The torch is on a well but the emitter prim is .1x.1x.177m and the chimney's emitter prim is 1.25x1.25x.5m so the emitter prim size is inconsistent in determining whether or not particles will disappear. |
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
02-19-2006 17:10
Check if there are other particle emitters around. The client sometimes gives priority to other larger emitters and may cull the one you're looking at. SL doesn't "cull" particles like this, however. SL will simply reduce the number of particles emitted if the particle count is too high for your setting but it won't just stop rendering them from specific distances like this... |
Ben Bacon
Registered User
Join date: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 809
|
02-20-2006 00:35
Yeah - I have seen this as well.
As Eep says, emitter size is irrelevant. I had a bubble emitter whose bubbles were vanishing within less than 20m. By increasing the size of the bubbles (the particles) themselves, I could push that up to 50-something, without editing the emitter. This seems to have occurred since +- December last year, as that was approx when I first created the bubble tube. Is there any chance of this being corrected soon? I have implemented a nasty work-around, which I would like to remove as soon as possible. |
Cottonteil Muromachi
Abominable
![]() Join date: 2 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,071
|
02-20-2006 05:11
Sorry, when I said 'larger emitters', I was referring to those that chuck out more particles per second thats hogging it. But I guess the client does seem to distribute it as evenly as possible.
I tested this out and Eep is right, that the 0.1 sized particles get culled at 20m or so. To workaround this, just use a larger .TGA file and only use a small portion in the middle to create the particle, leaving most of the surrounding transparent. I tried this with a 256x256 file with particles set at 1m size. It doesn't get culled and seems to solve the problem. By the way, the SL Answers thread more or less functions as a complaint sponge for most people. It just soaks up issues without any need to resolve them thoroughly. Torley seems to be quite the absorbent Linden for now. Heh heh heh. Happy Voodoo dolling, Eep. |
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
02-20-2006 05:24
Sorry, when I said 'larger emitters', I was referring to those that chuck out more particles per second thats hogging it. But I guess the client does seem to distribute it as evenly as possible. I tested this out and Eep is right, that the 0.1 sized particles get culled at 20m or so. To workaround this, just use a larger .TGA file and only use a small portion in the middle to create the particle, leaving most of the surrounding transparent. I tried this with a 256x256 file with particles set at 1m size. It doesn't get culled and seems to solve the problem. The problem with this is you lose the scale allowance (being only able to go from 1-4m vs. .1-4m, for example). I have a lot of particle effects that rely on being able to go very small (0m) to the max particle size of 4m (which I'd like to be increased, incidentally). LL just needs to fix this annoyance and stop screwing with things that don't have that much of an affect on framerate (particles) and fix the things that DO (AGP texture buffers, apparently, according to Vektor Linden). Ever since SL 1.7 avatar lag has been ATROCIOUS. LL needs to focus explicitly on this issue and not implement any NEW features until this is fixed! By the way, the SL Answers thread more or less functions as a complaint sponge for most people. It just soaks up issues without any need to resolve them thoroughly. Torley seems to be quite the absorbent Linden for now. Heh heh heh. Yea, s/he is still new as a Linden, so I wonder how long it'll before s/he gets sick of dealing with everyone--but considering the # of post s/he has posted so far... It would be nice if more technical-minded Lindens (as in the ones who actually do the coding) would participate. No offense to the PR buffers, but I'd rather talk to the people who actually make SL happen. |
Ben Bacon
Registered User
Join date: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 809
|
02-20-2006 05:43
To workaround this, just ... |
Ben Bacon
Registered User
Join date: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 809
|
02-20-2006 05:50
It would be nice if more technical-minded Lindens (as in the ones who actually do the coding) would participate. No offense to the PR buffers, but I'd rather talk to the people who actually make SL happen. ![]() Recent history shows that Torley takes your question (if she can't answer it herself), finds out who the relevant developer is, and then takes the issue to them for additional action, acting as a dispatcher to make sure that every other Linden doesn't lose 2/3 of their day reading forums - much as the ResMods aloow Jeska to get actual work done. In the words of the prophet: "If Torley did not exist, someone would have had to invent her." |
Cottonteil Muromachi
Abominable
![]() Join date: 2 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,071
|
02-20-2006 05:53
I have a feeling LL has very few techies that they can spare to do support. The bugs that come out with every release seem to be growing, mostly things which weren't broken in the first place. I think the client is nearing its last leg of life, with everyone having a real party trying to patch up this leaky boat thats leaking from every imaginable corner using masking tape and half chewed bubblegum.
Thats why I try not to complain much, even though there are all sorts of irritations abound. It probably won't get anywhere just getting angry alone. I guess I just come from a different background that doesn't demand as much customer rights as a consumer. |
Cottonteil Muromachi
Abominable
![]() Join date: 2 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,071
|
02-20-2006 05:57
That's the nasty workaround I didn't want to mention in case everyone starts using it - and then neglects to replace after a fix gets implemented. If a workaround is ever perfect, then we wouldn't need developers. Aren't most of us still using sit teleports? |
Ben Bacon
Registered User
Join date: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 809
|
02-20-2006 06:22
If a workaround is ever perfect, then we wouldn't need developers. Aren't most of us still using sit teleports? ![]() |
Cottonteil Muromachi
Abominable
![]() Join date: 2 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,071
|
02-20-2006 06:35
I'll trade a bag of M&M's for your S3 Virge video card?
![]() |
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
02-20-2006 06:37
If a workaround is ever perfect, then we wouldn't need developers. Aren't most of us still using sit teleports? Only because LL thought telehubs were a good idea and decided to, idiotically, remove point teleporting. Thankfully, they finally got a clue and put point teleporting back. Active Worlds had a similar history with point teleporting but quickly implemented it (and kept it!) earlier on in its development than LL did (who, according to the SL History Wiki used to CHARGE for teleporting--that's just ridiculous(!) and more evidence of LL being greedy...). |
Ben Bacon
Registered User
Join date: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 809
|
02-20-2006 06:40
Two bags - or no deal.
|
Cottonteil Muromachi
Abominable
![]() Join date: 2 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,071
|
02-20-2006 06:49
idiotically ridiculous greedy Hear that Ben? I can only spare another half eaten bag, and thats it. |
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
03-19-2006 12:29
Any Linden care to comment on this? It's not even in the known issues list...
|
Starax Statosky
Unregistered User
Join date: 23 Dec 2003
Posts: 1,099
|
03-19-2006 12:49
Dear Eep.
To overcome this problem, I place the particles in a large transparent prim. Yours sincerely - Me. |
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
03-19-2006 13:03
It doesn't work, Star. I've set the prim to 10m³ and particles still proportionally get clipped (smaller ones sooner than larger ones). Prim/emitter size is irrelevant and will also get removed relative to object LOD and draw distance (64m min). However, again, the smallest particles are getting clipped within 20m--well before 64m and when object LOD should be removing prims completely!
It's all been explained above... |
Upshaw Underhill
Techno-Hobbit
Join date: 13 Mar 2003
Posts: 293
|
03-19-2006 13:29
I've seen this too Eep... my Particle wings can actually disappear from my alt-zooming away from myself... they're small particles admittedly but it's some other draw distance that's being enforced.
As I alt-zoom away a plane cuts through the particle streams, it's nothing to do with whether the attachment prims are visible. I'll have to take a look at it again this evening and figure out how far zoomed out I am when it's occuring. L8r, UU |
Shack Dougall
self become: Object new
![]() Join date: 9 Aug 2004
Posts: 1,028
|
03-25-2006 05:20
Particles do not behave in a predictable way in my experience. Although I haven't had a problem with particle size or distance, I have noticed that particles in general get dropped in odd ways.
It's difficult to get a handle on, but it is definitely affected by draw distance and by client FPS. Possibly by drivers and end hardware. I've had situations where I was at 128m draw and maybe 18FPS and couldn't see all my particles. But if I dropped the draw to 96m, the particles were fine, even though my FPS didn't change. 1.9 seemed to improve this situation somewhat for me, but it definitely seems to me that the particle system could use some work. One of the reasons that we don't see particles used more is that they're so persnickity. You can't count on them and it seems to affect each client in a different way. _____________________
Prim Composer for 3dsMax
-- complete offline builder for prims and sculpties in 3ds Max http://liferain.com/downloads/primcomposer/ Hierarchical Prim Archive (HPA) -- HPA is is a fully-documented, platform-independent specification for storing and transferring builds between Second Life-compatible platforms and tools. https://liferain.com/projects/hpa |
Candide LeMay
Registered User
Join date: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 538
|
03-25-2006 14:46
I have a feeling LL has very few techies that they can spare to do support. The bugs that come out with every release seem to be growing, mostly things which weren't broken in the first place. I think the client is nearing its last leg of life, with everyone having a real party trying to patch up this leaky boat thats leaking from every imaginable corner using masking tape and half chewed bubblegum. Thats why I try not to complain much, even though there are all sorts of irritations abound. It probably won't get anywhere just getting angry alone. I guess I just come from a different background that doesn't demand as much customer rights as a consumer. ![]() _____________________
"If Mel Gibson and other cyberspace writers are right, one day the entire internet will be like Second Life." -- geldonyetich
|
Eep Quirk
Absolutely Relative
![]() Join date: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,211
|
03-25-2006 14:53
Eep, I'd like to inquire further about this for you--it's unclear to me what exactly is being described in the thread, however. If you could please include a step-by-step guide to help us better understand what you're seeing, and perhaps include images in there too (as I previously did when describing object culling), that would be superb. Thanks in advance! Quoting what I previously wrote (please actually READ it this time): Anyway, there's not really any pic I could send that would illustrate this since it's hard to tell with a static image. You just need to put a particle script in an invisible 10m³ prim and set the particle size to, say, .1m. Then, once the particle system is running (duh), zoom the camera in and out and watch the particles disappear/reappear about 20m away. The smaller the particles, the closer they'll disappear/reappear and the larger the particles, the farther they'll disappear/reappear. On further investigation, there are other particle disappearance issues too. I set a test particle script that emits a static (dropped) 4m particle for 1 second and it disappears 20m away on a single, unlinked .5m³ emitter prim (27m away on a .01m³ prim). Now, I have my visibility ("draw distance" ![]() |