I made an SL thing that makes other things! I call it “the Thingmaker”. ’cause it makes things.

Here is a picture of it:


(It doesn’t actually matter what it looks like, it could even be just a plywood box but then it would be hard to tell from all of the other plywood boxes.)

Here’s a picture of the first interesting thing that it made while I was working on it:

The first interesting thing

Here’s a picture of the Thingmaker making a thing:

Making a thing

(It rezzes the prims of the thing above it, one by one, links them, positions and colors them, and when it’s all done unlinks itself from them.)

Here’s (a picture of) the thing that the Thingmaker was making in the previous picture:

Another thing

Thing-like, eh?

Here’s a picture of another thing it made:

Yet another thing

Lower-prim! Shiny!

And also:

Colorful thing

Higher-prim! Colorful!

An’ here you’re probably thinking, an’ you’d be right, that the Thingmaker can only make a pretty small set of things, mostly made of these shiny overlapping eggshaped prims. But! Now that the basic Thinkmaker is working, I’m gonna teach it to make a whole bunch other more kinds of things. If I don’t get distracted…

Oh look! Ants!



Having picked up a copy of AM Radio’s lovely roadster (Michele and Chestnut both wrote up the event), I naturally wanted to drive it around. I was frustrated on one racetrack, designed more for puny go-karts than big muscular roadsters that want lots of room to devour. Then Michele suggested the big empty salt-flats of (appropriately enough!) an AM Radio build.

Here I am, having just rezzed the roadster. Does it not go beautifully with the setting and the sky?

AM Radio 32 Roadster (KelvinBlue Oh edition)

(Click through to flickr on all of these for access to larger sizes etc.)

Michele got hers out as well. They were different colors!


We didn’t figure out until later that there’s a dashboard control that lets the driver instantly recolor the car. Another advantage of SL! That, and harmless crashes. :)

Here’s roughly the same picture with the HUD showing. (The roadster includes a lovely HUD dashboard, that also puts the world in a very AM-Radio soft light.)


Tearing happily around the salt flats:


(And yeah, I was by coincidence wearing a dress shirt and vest that went very nicely with the overall ambiance.)

Parked out by AM’s 1912 Spring Racer airplane, available for a mere 700L (I bought one):


Proceeds go to the Heifer International charity.

AM Radio’s sense of design is amazing. These pictures just take themselves. :)

Quick Evony Update

Since I’ve mentioned Evony here before, I thought I ought to link to Bruce on Games on Evony, which reveals all sortsa interesting things about the game, including the fact that the curvy females in their ads are apparently ripped off from like lingerie catalogs, and the Evony owners are aggressively spamming all sorts of gaming-related venues to try to lure more players in.

zomg hax.


OdalisqueIn the last few days, two different artist friends independantly sent me landmarks to Odalisque, with IMs of the “you HAVE TO see this” kind. And this is my landmark to you: you have to see this. Ideally you should see it before you read the rest of this, ’cause I’m going to talk about it; but in fact the visual (the visceral) effect of the piece is strong enough that whatever my words of mine you might have read beforehand probably won’t make much difference.

I happened to arrive (much too late last night) while Calli Christensen and some other friends were also there. Calli said something very true.

listening to people here is interesting

Seeing the piece alone would be a powerful experience. Seeing the piece with other folks there, being touched by it in their various ways, and saying or not saying their various things, adds a whole ‘nother layer.

She’s gorgeous!

That was me. :) I love bodies, atoms, concreteness, earthiness. And the woman in this piece embodies all of those things, real and unretouched, not airbrushed or edited or decorated, just there, relaxed, maybe sleeping, being reality itself. There’s this great little crescent-shaped mark just under her right knee, an benign indentation from the world.

Other people said similar things. “She is beautiful,” “she is real,” “beautiful and brave,” “I love her,” “she is very beautiful and sexy”.

i see enough fat c–t working at the supermarket
nice sculpt, but why couldn’t it be slim chick

These two gems from the same person in the crowd, a woman. (I’m actually fond of the c-word that I’ve censored there, but not when it’s used like this.) A couple of people opined that she must be a (rude) young man in RL, but she and a friend responded that she was female in RL, and would be glad to prove it in voice.

That anyone would divide women into “fat c–t” (bad) and “slim chick” (good), is pretty sad. That a woman would do that is even sadder. I wonder if she is someone young and pretty enough that she’s never had to think about just how legitimate magazine-cover standards are, or if on the other hand she’s internalized those standards enough that she feels fatally imperfect herself, and doesn’t like being reminded of it. But either way, maybe, standing around for awhile listening to other people’s reactions, and looking at the solid form sitting there, undisturbed, maybe even she opened a bit.

(“Nice sculpt” is quite correct. A few dozen sculpty prims, amazingly detailed shape and texture. Her nose is marvelously nose-shaped, her curves wonderfully curvy. I’m very curious to know if they were shaped by hand, or from a mechanical scan of the model.)

thats the future of texture and rendering of avatars right there..i cant wait

Now there’s a thought! I’m more ambivalent about it than the speaker (who can claim her statement if she’d like :) ), but I’m not sure why. I think (‘though I’m not sure) that we’re already on the other side of the Eerie Valley, so getting more realistic isn’t likely to make us seem creepy. Maybe I’m afraid that incredibly realistic AVs will make it impossible for amateurs to get into the skin or shape business? Maybe I’m afraid that incredibly realistic humans AVs will make non-human ones (furries, aliens, robots, art) less common, or less valued? Dunno. I’m not against the idea, just ambivalent. For some reason.

RightAsRain hates women and loathes fat women in particular — so does Starax (or whoever 3D Soup is). Let’s not prettify this assault by calling it “art”.

This from a well known weblog. (RightAsRain Rimbaud is with Rezzable, who’s sponsoring the piece, and 3D Soup is the creator; rumors swirl that this is the same artist as Starax Statosky and Light Waves.)

What would make someone call a realistic (and, to my eye, sympathetic and beautiful) depiction of a human body (at rest, in no demeaning position or activity, with those parts that would offend your average prude gracefully hidden) “grotesque” and an “attack”, and to conclude that those behind it hate women? I mulled this over, driving a child here and there through a rainstorm, and the best I can come up with is that the writer of those words thinks that being that shape is shameful, and that people who are that shape must be kept hidden, that we should pretend they don’t exist, or that they’re really some other shape, and that therefore showing a woman that shape realistically is violating that shame. But I could be wrong; I hope I am.

Update: I’ve been convinced by the comments :) that someone could think (especially if they have a pre-existing dislike for Rezzable) “Putting out this work is a cynical attempt to cause destructive conflicts in the community, and anyone who would use a large woman for such a bad purpose must loathe large women, and as such the act is grotesque”. I find the argument very implausible :) but at least it does account for some of the views expressed without requiring any feelings of shame over largeness, so that’s good.

She is lovely and endearing and we all know someone like her in Real Life.

This from Bettina Tizzy over at NPIRL. I’m with her. :)

So anyway! Go! Look at it! See how it makes you feel. Listen to what the other people there say. Be part of it.

More mentions: L1Aura Loire (on both Botgirl and Odalisque), Emilly Orr, NWN, Trinity Halderstadt (on flickr), Michele, Soror Nishi (also a bit worried about the realism aspects), Sarah Nerd.

(Footnote: Rezzable seems to have a talent for finding neat art and then making it slightly annoying to experience. There’s a guest book for comments at Odalisque, but when I tried to use it it told me that my AV wasn’t associated with a Rezzable account, and did I want to visit their web page and sign up? I didn’t. I guess it’s all part of having to monetize things to pay tier, but it was a slight sour note in the music.)

Pointed Babble

Twitter bird eating a pear.  I know, pretty silly.
We interrupt our regularly-scheduled stream of narcissistic pictures to comment on this story, because we keep saying this in comment threads and Plurks and mailing lists and stuff, and we are a Twitter user, so we thought we might as well say it here:

This “study” is silly.

Silly in, I kinda suspect, the “advertisement thinly disguised as science” sense of “silly”.

Background: some soi-disant analytics company published a glitzy paper full of cartoon diagrams, the major headline of which is that 40% of Twitter postings (more than any other category) are “pointless babble”. And oh by the way just mentioning in passing they are currently beta-testing (but I’m sure have no financial interest in) a new product designed to help people filter that stuff out (and here’s the URL to find out more).

This is making lots of headlines (even here on th’ weblog, sigh), because of course people love to say either “Twitter sux0rs!”, or “does not!”. But in fact the study (and I use the term loosely) seems to have been designed to produce exactly this result, and therefore adds little or nothing to our knowledge of the world or of the suxiness of Twitter.

What they did was, they took 2000 Twitter postings, counted the ones that were stuff you could find on the National News, the ones that were spam (of two kinds), the ones that were obviously parts of conversations, and the ones that had “RT” in them (i.e. “retweets” of something someone else had previously posted), and then labelled everything else “pointless babble”. (A nice objective scientific term, eh?)

In particular, any use of Twitter for the thing it was originally designed for, posting a brief description of what you’re doing right now so your friends can follow along, was presumably categorized as “pointless babble”.

And then they got big headlines for finding out that there’s alot of that on Twitter.


(A more thoughtful discussion can be found on apophenia; I am still at the facepalming stage.)


I am for some reason Rather Sleepy, so I am mostly going to point to the press release and the SLURL (more or less) for the “Arcana” show currently going on in Caerleon. (I lurve the artists of Caerleon, but I for the life of me cannot spell the name of their sim.) It’s a show based on the Major Arcana (aka Trumps) of the Tarot Deck.

I went there! It was fun! Here are a few pictures!

The Magician, by FreeWee Ling, lets the viewer become part of the picture (interestingly reminiscent of our previous weblog entry!). Vis:

Arcana: the Magician

There I am! (The crown I am wearing is, by the way, a free gift from The Fool.)

Next is a really poorly composed snapshot of v good friend Sabrinaa Nightfire’s rendering of The Hermit; it looks much (even?) better in person:

Arcana: the Hermit

Poid Mahovlich’s The Sun is notably sunny:

Arcana: the Sun

And I’m not even going to show you Banrion Constantine’s version of The Lovers, ’cause I think it’s so cool that you should really go look; but here’s the sign outside it, to whet (or possibly perk) (perk?) your interest:

Arcana: the Lovers (sign)

There are a bunch of others, natch, all starting with The Fool, by Miso Susanowa, which I don’t have a picture of. The Fool has flavor text (as they say) with various interesting facts about the Major Arcana, including the suggestion (which I don’t remember hearing before but which sounds quite right) that one interpretation of the Tarot is as a depiction of the (no doubt very metaphorical) travels or trials or life or whatever of The Fool himself, the zeroth card of the Trumps.

So you should go and see this show! I found it slightly confusing to navigate around until I realized that the things that look sort of like doctors’ scales are teleporters, and when you activate the standing-on part, you get a menu of places organized by the name of the artist. Thus armed with knowledge, off you go!

Art Box

This is another “pictures of a neat artsy place to go” sort of post. (The next one probably will be, too, unless I get distracted.) In this case the neat artsy place to go is Art Box (that link goes to their web page, where you’ll find a SLURL an’ all). And once again it’s v good friend Michele who found the place, and I jes tagged along. :)

The first inneresting thing that the Art Box people do is take RL-type visual artworks of various kinds, and make SL versions of them. Here’s their homage to A Sonnet of Love by contemporary art-person Rob Hefferan:

Art Box 1

which is very nice, but the really inneresting that they do is give you a chance to enter into the art:

Art Box 2

That’s me in nice yellow gown replacing the person in the picture, with Michele an’ the amazing Art Box persons (more on whom below) looking on.

They’ve done this to a Whole Bunch of artworks of various kinds, and there’s some utterly lovely scripting behind it all: you select the particular artwork you want (either from a menu in a corner control box, or by selecting a picture of it on the upstairs balcony), and the entire main room of the installation converts foom into the SL representation of the work you’ve chosen. Then, depending on the work, when you sit within the room, one of the people in the work may disappear and be replaced by you, or you may fill in an empty place, or whatever. And, if there are clothing or props associated with the work, there’s a little crate off to the side where you can pick up, say, the car full of people screaming in terror at you, if you are The Fifty Foot Woman:

Art Box 3

An’ Here is Michele being the Fifty Foot Woman, before she had a chance to pick up her car:

Art Box 4

but she is nicely scary even without it. :)

Some of the pictures they’ve done can hold more than one person, even. Name That Famous Image!

Art Box 5

I’d changed clothes (and skin and hair and…) for that one, and the new outfit was gratifyingly almost-appropriate for the next one we summoned up:

Art Box 6

(Note that I am still holding my little car in this picture; shortly after I replaced it with the sandwich-prop from the crate, which was more appropriate if less amusing. The original of this picture can be found all over the Web.)

The Art Box people themselves are extremely approachable, friendly, funny, smart, and so on. Not to mention dead-cute:

Art Box 7

That’s Frankie Rockett and Violet Sweetwater, who is them. I really ought to interview them for the ol’ Virtual Artists Alliance weblog or somefing; they are neat. We talked for quite awhile, mostly about how amazing it all was.

Here is Michele being Red Hot, for the obvious reason :)

Art Box 8

and here are we both, in another “Name that Image”, waving byebye, and encouraging you to check out th’ Art Box yourself immediately if not sooner:

Art Box 9