Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category

This is a meta-post about how to configure your viewer to see everything the artists intend you to see. Those of you with gaming übercomputers can skip this post; you’re already seeing everything. But readers with more modest computers might need to be aware of how their Second Life graphics preferences interact with the visuals of art here at Brooklyn is Watching and elsewhere in Second Life.

First is your choice of viewer. Windlight, the new visual rendering code introduced in 1.19.1, changes the appearance of most things in Second Life, sometimes drastically. (Lighting, both sun/moon and local lights, are especially different.) Artists were among the earliest adopters of Windlight, so anything made in the past six months is likely to look not quite right in an older viewer.

Some artists have started to work with glow effects. Glow was added to Second Life with Windlight (1.19.1) and was made scriptable in 1.20 (currently still in Release Candidate status). Some recent works at BiW, such as Oxoc Ah’s plasma experiments, can only be seen in their full glory with the RC viewer, or with 1.20 or later once released.

Your graphics preferences (Edit/Preferences, and then pick the Graphics tab — or if you prefer, Control-P) can also have a major effect on how art looks. Unfortunately, the options that make the art look better also make your viewer slower, so residents with slower computers might have to increase settings to view art, and then turn them back down for other SL use.

I’m only going to be talking about the preferences for Windlight viewers (1.19.1 and later); if you’re still using something older you’re on your own. To get full control over the things I’m going to be talking about, you need to check the Custom checkbox, next to the slider that has Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings. If you’re at High or Ultra and you’re happy with the performance of your viewer, you can stop reading now; you’re already seeing everything.

The most important settings are the checkboxes in the Shaders section. Bump Mapping and Shiny is essential; half the art at BiW (anything with metallic surfaces) will look wrong without it. Fortunately, its performance impact is small. The next checkbox, Basic Shaders, also has a big effect on the appearance of art. But this one also has a large performance impact on some systems, including my laptop with integrated graphics, so I keep them off much of the time and turn them on for art viewing. Without Basic Shaders, the sun/moon lighting will look flat and glow won’t work. The next checkbox, Atmospheric Shaders, is what makes the Windlight sky look pretty; it’s less important for viewing art. The final one, Water Reflections, doesn’t matter most of the time, but it does make a difference for viewing pieces that interact with the water such as Bob | Box by Mencius Watts and Taggert Alsop.

Next is the Lighting Detail section. Any pieces that use light effects won’t look right if you have “sun and moon only” selected here; that turns off rendering of all light prims. Local lighting has almost zero performance impact if your graphics card implements it in hardware, but a big effect if it does not.

Draw distance is important for viewing some of the really large pieces. The 128m default for the High level is enough for just about all art; smaller values like 96m (the Medium default) or 64m (the Low default) may cause you not to see the more distant parts of some large installations.

Some works use particle effects; basically, most things that spew out temporary effects that you can see but can’t touch. So it’s important not to set the Max Particle Count to zero, which disables all particle rendering. So far I haven’t seen any art at BiW that uses really large numbers of particles, so modest values like 1024 should work fine.

The only detail sliders likely to have any effect on your art viewing are Objects and Flexiprims. Keep the Flexiprims detail all the way to the right if at all possible; low detail for those looks really ugly. Object detail is less critical, though more is always better if your system can support it. Avatar detail could matter if you’re watching a piece of performance art — it changes the distance at which avatar imposters (lower-res 2D versions of avatars)  take over from the normal avatars.

Finally, in the Hardware Options section, there are two options that can make your Second Life prettier in a subtle way: Anisotropic Filtering and Antialiasing. I suggest using 4x antialiasing if your hardware can support it without a big speed drop; it makes all those jagged edges look a little smoother.

There are a number of viewer bugs related to snapshots. If you take pictures, either in-world or saved to disk, and they don’t look like you expect them to, you may just have to find another way to do things for now. Screen captures are effective, but are a pain to do because you have to get all the viewer UI out of your way. (Snapshots automaticaly hide the user interface and HUDs.)

Torley Linden did a video tutorial about setting these and other options. If you’re not sure how to change these things, have a look.

Hope this has been enlightening. Happy viewing!

first nations series sculptures by Cheen Pitney

Posted by Shirley Marquez on July 3rd, 2008

first nations series sculptures by Cheen Pitney

Cheen Pitney has placed three sculptures from his first nations series: BEAR DANCER, EAGLE DANCER, and ORCA DANCER; the three dancers are gathered around another work, BONFIRE. When I saw these, it was clear that I was looking at the work of a very talented sculptor; the only thing I couldn’t figure out is how his work had managed to elude me in the past. Go read his blog, go look at more of his work; that’s all I can say. Mere mortals like me aren’t fit to criticize the gods.

plasma experiments by Oxoc Ah

Posted by Shirley Marquez on July 3rd, 2008

plasma experiments by Oxoc Ah

plasma experiments (with glow) by Oxoc Ah

This piece by Oxoc Ah looks like something out of a mad scientist’s laboratory; mysterious apparatus with glowing beams traveling between them. I don’t see any deep message here, but it’s fun to look at and the execution of the idea is good.

I have included two photographs to show a problem in the current RC viewer. The top one was taken with “Snapshot to Disk” with “High-res Snapshot” enabled; it’s a nice view of the framework of this piece but loses most of the point of it, because the glow doesn’t appear in the photo. The second one is a screenshot, cropped to take out the UI elements; that’s the way you would see the piece in your viewer — but it’s only half the size in each direction, because I can’t take advantage of the “high-res snapshot” feature in the Advanced menu. It turns out to be the same reason that Selavy’s recent playground space looked different in photos, it’s now in the JIRA as VWR-8033.

Even the better photo doesn’t show the dynamic nature of this work, so you’ll just have to go look for yourself!

the girl on the swing x & y*big by Robin Moore

Posted by Shirley Marquez on July 2nd, 2008

the girl on the swing x & y*big by Robin Moore

Robin Moore’s workcreates a third dimension in the same way that the classic Disney animated films did: by using multiple planes. (It appears to be built entirely of flat pictures of things; rather than containing some objects made from prims.) But instead of having to rely on the animators to explore the third dimension, we can freely move our camera to see into the depths of the picture. (Moving your camera is a must for this work; looking at it strictly from one position just won’t give you the effect it is meant to produce.) I liked the “forward into the past” aspect of exploring this old way of creating depth, and felt that the moving swing added to the evocation of animation past.

(Historical background: through the 1980s, Disney animators would put cels on glass plates that were placed in layers in front of a background drawing. The filmmakers would get the illusion of movement and changing camera position by physically moving the camera and shooting through the layers at different angles; the glass plates could also be moved to create additional movement, and the cels replaced with new drawings to illustrate character movement. In the 1990s this technique was replaced by computer compositing; the cels for the various layers were scanned and assembled by computer. This new technique made more freedom of movement possible; for example, the ballroom scene in Beauty and the Beast would have been impossible to shoot with the older method.)

Edited to add: the description of the piece names the girl as wish Serevi.

episodic.phi.puppet by Ichibot Nishi

Posted by Shirley Marquez on July 2nd, 2008

episodic.phi.puppet by Ichibot Nishi

Near the playground, Ichibot offers us a work that leaves me trying to untangle its layers of meaning. A dimpled sphere next to the playground launches hand puppets; the puppets land on the path between the playground and the castle, bouncing around a bit before coming to a stop. They are physical, so the viewer can kick them around; they are also temporary, so each puppet disappears after about a minute. There appears to be some random element in the launcher; the puppets are not all launched in exactly the same direction or with the same amount of force. Still, sometimes a newly launched puppet bumps into one or more of the ones that are already on the ground, and they interact.

The faces of the puppets are not typical youthful-looking child images, as one commonly sees on toys; rather, they have a wrinkled face, with a mustache truncated on both ends that reminds me of Adolf Hitler. The body part is small; my first reaction on seeing the piece is that the things tumbling were severed heads, not puppets. The puppet bodies come in random colors, but otherwise the puppets all appear to be identical.

This piece make me think of a lot of things. The location near the playground evokes toys that are casually thrown around by children. The severed look of them, combined with the vaguely Hitleresque look of the faces, suggests violence and perhaps retribution. And their colorful nature and the fact that they are physical suggest interaction and play. Very mixed messages, and I think that ambivalence is what makes it interesting.

Henry (doors open) by Hollow Prim

Posted by Shirley Marquez on July 2nd, 2008

Henry (doors open) by Hollow Prim

Henry is a clockwork robot. The outside is nice enough, with good prim work and texturing, but the interesting stuff is inside. Mini-Henrys are at work keeping him going, there are working gears and a fireplace to provide power, and even a heart. Make sure to have a look at the back; there is another open door there with more visible works. I see it as an allegory on the insides of humans (emotional as well as physical), and how different they are from the shell we see on the outside.

There is a plaque above this piece:

“henry”

created for the Museum of Robots “build a robot challenge”

over 40 robots on display now through late July

click here for landmark

(Edited to add that the title I used is based on the name of the object - capitalized, and with the (doors open) text. The title on the plaque is not capitalized. I try to spell and capitalize the names of art as the artist does; this one was difficult because the artist did it two different ways.)

SL artist interviewed by RL newspaper reporter

Posted by jvanb on June 30th, 2008

Alanna Martinez interveiws Selavy Oh about SL art at BIW

Local Brooklyn Journalist Alanna Martinez interviewed Selavy Oh at Brooklyn is Watching yesterday for her upcoming story in the Williamsburg / Greenpoint Arts and News. We’ll post a link to it here as soon as its released, which i’m told is likely to be sometime next week.