I'd like to see an implementation of turning on and off the lip sync feature that can be user tested to demonstrate that a new user of SL could be instructed to "Turn off the moving lips" and easy turn the feature off within 30 seconds or so.
I agree that a software developer, or someone who is already familiar with the Advanced menus can do fine the way it is, but I'd like to move with this project toward a viewer that is "generally appealing" - meaning just as usable to a brand new user of Second Life as an existing one or an experienced developer. Does this make sense? Philip Mike Monkowski wrote: > Philip Rosedale wrote: >> * We need a clear and discoverable place in the UI where this >> feature can be enabled and disabled. Probably prefs. Can someone >> take on that design and coding? Advanced-> isn't the right home for >> this. We should do that work properly and well to complete this >> feature. > > At least for the time being, I think it should be left in Advanced. > Torley's video describing it points to the Advanced menu. After a > while, it might make sense to move it, but to change the default > condition and move the UI control at the same time seems a bit devious. > >> * Can someone (Mike?) add a bit more detail on the jira task to >> defend/review that the CPU impact is strictly capped. For example, >> what is the LOD behavior if there are 100 avatars all talking at the >> same time. We have LOD tricks for various rendering aspects of the >> system, do they correctly carry through? Does the CPU load of the >> feature vary by GPU? I think we need this level of documentation. > > Lip sync gets intensity indicators from voice chat the same way that > the green indicators do, so that is zero overhead. All it does is > change the morph weights for two localized morphs, very similar to eye > blinks. I have used the Fast Timers to try to measure any difference, > but see none. I never tried 100 avatars talking at once. The most I > ever heard speaking at once is about three. Yes, the LOD processing > stays exactly the same. The two new morphs were derived from existing > morphs. > >> * As to the question of whether to default it on or off, clearly it >> is a complex issue. I'd say lets default it on, and make sure it is >> easy to find the way to turn it off. For some use cases it is very >> cool, lending immersion and cueing as to speaker. For other cases >> you will want it off. We are still at the point where the 'uncanny >> valley' nature of the feature can make it unnerving, and that problem >> is unlikely to be easily solved soon in realtime with low CPU load. > > Hmmm. Faces that don't move while talking are unnerving to me, like > the commercials with the mannequins. Creepy. > >> As a final note, I'd say this is a good example of a tough topic >> where the right call is unclear and discussion and debate is >> appropriate. Also a good case of where if need be, I can just make a >> call and we move on and see what happens. Given that, why the >> rudeness I am seeing here? I don't see a need to be insulting to >> each other over this topic. Maybe I've missed some painful history >> here, but can't see how this is helping us move forward. I wouldn't >> work internally on projects at LL with colleagues that were overly >> rude, I don't see why it should be any different here! > > I haven't sensed any rudeness from others, just open discussion. If I > have been rude, I apologize. I did not intend to be. > > Mike > _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
