Maya and Sculpty Export

I have a couple of questions regarding the creation of sculpties using Maya and the export MEL script, and the resulting sculpt in SL.

1) When developing a model in Maya, is it best to scale the object to be the same size/scale that it is in SL? That is, if the end result is a 1m diameter sphere in SL, should I model it in Maya as a 1m sphere? The reason I ask, is that I am modeling a shoe in Maya, and I used an arbitrary size. It happens to be about 2m long in Maya, given the unit size in the preferences set to 1m. When I import it into SL (after using the export MEL script, with primscript generation, and the SL sculpt assembly scripts created by Qarl), the resulting objects are, as I guess I expected, about 2m long. I have to scale the grouping down to be a size that will fit the SL avatar foot. One of the things I noticed (besides the length that this first question is becoming) with the pieces of the shoe, is that I need to adjust the scale and position of the pieces slightly to be lined up and look like it does in Maya. I was wondering if I made the shoe at the correct SL scale in Maya, that I wouldn't have to do post-importing edits.

2) The default sculpt map size that is provided in the export MEL script is 64x64. I have read elsewhere in these forums that some create sculpt maps that are 128x128. Which size is more appropriate? Are sculpties "smoother" if they are imported as 128x128 than 64x64. If not, then why do it?

Thanks in advance for the replies.

After a week without any replies, I will bump this to the top to see if anyone has any answers.

Sorry it took a week for you to get any replies, JH.


Generally, yes. It's also best to use the Maximize Scale option when exporting. This helps ensure that the physical size of the model correlates with visual size. Otherwise, you can end up with collision spheres that are incredibly out of proportion with how the model looks.

Further, don't forget to freeze transformations, reset transformations, and delete all construction history before you export. You want your objects to originate at the origin of the grid, and to be neutral. Transformations and histories can interfere with proper exportation, and proper sizing. Get rid of it all.


For anything that's going to be attached to an avatar, I recommend importing the mannequin model into your scene, and using it as a scaffold. Build your shoe right on top of the actual avatar foot, and you know it will fit in-world. Since the mannequins don't come with slider settings, you might need to play with it a bit by eye to make it approximate the standard size-zero foot for shoes. So it won't be totally accurate, but it's better than nothing.

In any case, since a shoe is typically maybe just a quarter of meter to maybe a third of meter long, I would not recommend making it two units long in Maya to start with. Keep it to scale as best you can. You don't want to run into a situation where small parts become too small to scale down.


I've never used Qarl's assembler (I use Eddy Stryker's primscript.exe assembler), so I can't really comment on whether or not it's got some slop to it. What I can say is that if you haven't been clearing out transformations and histories, that could certainly affect where things end up.

Also, there seems to be a bug in the last couple of releases that sometimes prevents linked sculpties from scaling uniformly. You go to scale the set, and one or two of the individual sculpties end up out of proportion compared to the others. It's annoying. Word to the wise, take a copy of the assembled object before you resize anything. Word to the wiser, create it at the right size to begin with, and you won't have to resize.




The reason people make sculpt maps bigger is to minimize the effects of compression artifacts from the lossy upload/conversion process. In theory, if you've got lossless upload turned on, you shouldn't have to worry about that. In practice, LL can't seem to get that feature to work, for reasons that baffle the imagination.

That's why I use Eddy's assembler. The lossless upload actually works properly in it. I never upload sculpt maps via the viewer, only with primscript.exe.

Thanks so much CF. I figured you must have been away the last week.

I think I have done all that you recommended. I may have missed selecting a couple of pieces when freezing and resetting transformations and deleting history. I just have to be vigilant when doing that.

I do use an avatar mannequin. Since I am making a high heeled shoe/sandal, I wanted to obtain an avatar model with the exact shoe size and shape that the shoe will fit (not appropriate to go into how I obtained it... ), to model the shoe on the foot. Now I see that my problem with this whole thing is that I scaled the mannequin model up to make it bigger, then modeled the shoe on the larger than (second) life avatar. If I left the avatar model as is, the shoe would have been the right size......Oh well....live and learn.

I will have to look into Eddie Stryker's primscript.exe (have been using SLImageUpload to upload files one at a time....what a pain...lol). I tried using it once, but it came up with an error when I used it. I don't recall what the error was, but I now believe it was caused due to the fact I didn't have baked textures in the folder; only sculpt maps and the prim.script file. I will revisit it next time.

Thanks again for your input, as well as all the other pointers you provide throughout these boards.

Where can we find this mannequin?

secondlife.com/downloads

So you know, whenever we're talking about anything LL has made available for download, that's typically where you'll find it. It's the same place you got your SL software from, for example.

Toward the bottom of the page, you'll see a link called Avatar Files. They're meant for animation purposes, but they're usable for other things as well, including what we've been talking about here.

Note that you may need to do some cleanup work after you import the OBJ's into Maya. The polygon groupings are a little weird, and sometimes the models end up with locked normals. This is especially true with the OBJ's that are part of the poser models. It just takes a few minutest to fix, so it's not really a big deal, but you'll need to know what you're doing with polygons.

Hi, I downloaded the mannequin and now i have a Avatar-Mesh folder right?

So how do I upload it to the program and use it? I have AC3D (but Ive never used it yet ) and I downloaded Wings3d (havent used it either ).

Just pretty lost right now.

What exactly do you mean by "upload it to the program"? To upload means to send data to another machine. I take it what you meant was how do you load, not upload. It might sound like a trivial difference, but I'm a stickler for terminology. Keeping wordings consistent is the only way to keep confusion to a minimum among everyone reading.

Anyway, Kian, since you say you've never used a 3D modeling program before, I'd recommend you slow down a little for the time being. Take a few weeks to get to know your program(s) of choice before you attempt to use them for anything SL related. Everything about SL is relatively unique. The specific techniques required for making SL-friendly objects, especially sculpties, are very unusual, and won't serve to teach you much about how 3D modeling in general works. Learn the basic foundations first, and you'll easily be able to apply your knowledge to what's needed for SL. But try just to learn the SL-specifics first, and you'll end up a bit handicapped.

In other words, as I so often say in these kinds of discussions, don't put the cart before the horse. Take this stuff one step at a time, and you'll get where you want to go. Don't try to skip ahead of yourself.

That said, the direct answer to your direct question about how to bring the mannequin models into your 3D application(s) is that you would import the OBJ files into your scene(s). OK, so what are OBJ files? Well, the simplest way to define it is with an analogy. OBJ is to 3D models as TXT is to text, or as BMP is to images. It's a simple format that nearly all programs in the genre can read.

Specific steps for importation will vary from program to program, but usually you'll find the Import command on the File menu. I'd imagine full instructions for importation are probably in the Help documentation for both of the programs you have. But I've never used either one of them, so I don't know for sure how good or bad their Help's might be.

A quick Google search for "wings obj import" lead me to this: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wings_3D/User_Manual/The_File_Menu . It states that Wings gives you an options box for OBJ import, which allows you to specify the scale (sizing) at which you want the model to appear. That's a good feature to have, since there's never any guarantee that the person who made any given model did or didn't happen to have been working at the same scale you're working at now. You'll need to experiment to find a good setting for each model you bring in. If the model is tiny, redo the import at a higher setting. If it's huge, redo it at a lower setting.

Also, keep in mind, as I said before, the models may need some cleanup work after importation, to suit the needs of the specific program you're using. You'll need a good working knowledge of the ins and outs of polygonal modeling in order to do that. At the very least, you'll need to know how to attach polygons together, since the models are set up in pieces. And if AC3D and/or Wings interprets the data the same way Maya does, you'll also need to know how to unlock and edit normals, since the mannequin models, for whatever reason, were saved with their normals all screwed up. (I've always assumed this is an artifact from Poser, which is where the models came from.)

If you've never done any 3D modeling before, I was probably talking over your head in that last paragraph or two. That's OK. That's why I said you should take a few weeks to learn the basics before you dive into anything as specific as what we've been talking about in this thread. After you've gotten a little experience under your belt, everything I just said will make total sense to you.

Thank you Chosen. Yes it is pretty much all Chinese to me but ill do as you say and just play with the program for awhile. But learning the program is one thing. Having to make adjustments from these external programs to comply with SL is another. The lack of understanding of all of the geeky terminology makes it really hard to follow a lot of these forum help threads and tutorials. It's a bit overwhelming for a novice without the help of someone being there physically to help along. LL really should make the sculpty building process easier for new users to pick up and get going with in SL. It is not a user-friendly feature at all.

Agreed. Unfortunately, it's not something that is easy to learn just by explanation. You need to immerse yourself in it, and eventually you absorb it. That goes a lot more smoothly if you have someone around who can show you the ropes. But it's not impossible to learn on your own.

I know it can seem in the beginning like there's this huge wall of knowledge that you're currently standing on the wrong side of. But it does get better. When I got started with all this, I was going back to college for the second time. That particular university didn't have a full program for 3D, so all I really got that was of value was a very basic introductory course on Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, and Dreamweaver, and then 2 classes on Maya. That was it. Everything else I know I've learned on my own.

Give it some time. You'll be fine.



I don't disagree that it's not user friendly, or at least that it's not newbie friendly, but I'm not entirely sure it's LL's responsibility to make it easier. This isn't the only aspect of content creation that requires skill with third party tools and knowledge of external concepts. Texturing, animation, and arguably even scripting, all require extensive expertise well outside the scope of just knowing your way around SL itself.

At what point do you draw the line? Should the viewer become something akin to the Star Trek computer, all encompassing, universal, capable of doing every last thing you can think of? Or should the viewer just be a viewer, and advanced content creation be left to other, more dedicated programs?

Personally, I'd much prefer the latter. If SL (or something like SL) is to become "the 3D Internet", then the interface to it has to get simpler, not more complex. Think about the browser you're using right now to read this. You can use it to create content in a very limited way, such as replying to this thread with your own post. But to create anything more complicated, like your own website, you wouldn't use a browser; you'd use a Web authoring tool like Dreamweaver or something.

I don't know what browser you use,but for the moment, let's say it's Firefox. Would it occur to you to say something like "Mozilla really should make the website building process easier for new users to pick up and get going with the Web"? Probably not. We all accept the concept the a browser is for browsing, not for advanced content creation. We have no problem acknowledging that making websites is hard, and that it requires expertise that not every user of a browser is going to have (or even want).

But some of us, for whatever reason, have a harder time accepting that the SL viewer is just what it name says it is, a viewer, not a be-all-end-all creation tool. Creating high level content for any platform requires knowledge, expertise, and experience with any number of tools. Should SL be so different?

These questions come up a lot, and discussing them is always interesting. When I think about it, as much as the artist in me would love to say "Yes, make the viewer capable of doing everything," the practical side of me can't help noticing that 90% of the people who join SL quit after 20 minutes because it's "too complicated" as it is. The more bells and whistles you add to the viewer, the more people get lost.

I'm all for SL having its capabilities expanded. I just don't think the viewer is the place to keep piling more and more advanced tools. Leave that to third party software, which will always do a better job anyway. Let the viewer view. Let other programs create.

Does that make it harder on budding artists? Maybe a little, at first. But at the same time, it also makes it easier. Learn to use tools that can be applied to lots of environments besides SL, and you've got a real skill. Pigeon hole yourself into just one platform, and your sunk if anything ever goes wrong with that platform.

If SL were to disappear tomorrow (it won't, but if it did), I'd be as disappointed as anyone, but at the end of the day, I'd just find another virtual world in which to do my thing. My skill set isn't so wrapped up in SL that it would really matter. I'd have to start over, which would be annoying, but I could make it work anywhere.

I'd encourage you to look at it that way yourself. Don't be an "SL artist"; just be an artist. Develop a skill set that can be applied anywhere you want, including SL, but not exclusive to it.