Plugins + Scripts Nipple & Pubic Hair Clipping Eliminator

[RunRudolf]

RunRudolf updated Nipple & Pubic Hair Clipping Eliminator with a new update entry:

Person Plugin Functionality Added

View attachment 559591
Credits: 'Ellie' by JackyCracky, 'Tyler' by PetaZwerga, 'Cuddle A' by KyraAngel

• The plugin can now be used as a normal person plugin. It will then only affect the person it is loaded on. The scene/session plugin functionalty is still there, detection is automatic.

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[RunRudolf]

RunRudolf updated Nipple & Pubic Hair Clipping Eliminator with a new update entry:

Improved Detection

View attachment 564831
Credits: Tyler by PetaZwerga, Ellie by JackyCracky, scenery setting is from 'Intimate Xperience' by PornPlayer

• Added several more tags to exclude false positive nipple and pubic hair hiding. Now almost all available clothing tags are taken into account, either preventing or forcing nipple / pubic hair hiding. As always, if you observe false positives or false negatives with a certain clothing item, just tag the respective...

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[Hideki_Kgemaya]

I understand the logic of hiding the pubic hair by setting the width to 0, but I noticed that the pubic hair still has grainy edges and isn't truly eliminated.

After manually entering 0, the grainy edges disappeared. I believe the plugin isn't setting the width to a true 0.

I don't understand the code, but through guesswork, I discovered that the hidden width value is 0.000001f. Changing it to 0 didn't work, but changing it to 0.000000f worked perfectly, and the hidden grainy edges disappeared.

I know there's a reason you didn't set it to 0. Did changing it to 0.000000f actually cause other problems?

It would be perfect if the grainy edges that appear after hiding the pubic hair could be removed.

 

[RunRudolf]

I understand the logic of hiding the pubic hair by setting the width to 0, but I noticed that the pubic hair still has grainy edges and isn't truly eliminated.

After manually entering 0, the grainy edges disappeared. I believe the plugin isn't setting the width to a true 0.

I don't understand the code, but through guesswork, I discovered that the hidden width value is 0.000001f. Changing it to 0 didn't work, but changing it to 0.000000f worked perfectly, and the hidden grainy edges disappeared.

I know there's a reason you didn't set it to 0. Did changing it to 0.000000f actually cause other problems?

It would be perfect if the grainy edges that appear after hiding the pubic hair could be removed.

Hi, you are right - hair width is set to 10-6 instead of zero. I do not remember why I put 0.000001f instead of 0f, maybe to be able to "detect" hidden hair easily based on this particular value, but looking at the code now I think it could be set to zero without problems. I think I will add a slider, in analogy to the flattened morph value, to allow users to select the desired "hidden hair width". Or better manipulate the three Length values, this will allow users to still have short pubic hair which does not clip, but keeping the look mostly. One last question: Under what circumstances do you see the hair with 10-6 width? I do not see anything with that small width.

 

[Hideki_Kgemaya]

Hi, you are right - hair width is set to 10-6 instead of zero. I do not remember why I put 0.000001f instead of 0f, maybe to be able to "detect" hidden hair easily based on this particular value, but looking at the code now I think it could be set to zero without problems. I think I will add a slider, in analogy to the flattened morph value, to allow users to select the desired "hidden hair width". Or better manipulate the three Length values, this will allow users to still have short pubic hair which does not clip, but keeping the look mostly. One last question: Under what circumstances do you see the hair with 10-6 width? I do not see anything with that small width.

English isn't my native language, so my understanding might be a bit inaccurate.

Do you mean 0.000001f for 10-6?

If it's a numerical value, I saw that line in the code.： if (width == 0.000001f) continue...

If you're referring to the visual aspect, when someone has thick, long, black pubic hair and wears light-colored underwear like white, the black granular outline of the pubic hair is visible.（screenshot; you may need to zoom in to see it.）

If the numerical value can be set to 0g or 0 without affecting functionality, then I think there's no visual problem. Currently, after modifying your code, I haven't noticed any visual anomalies.
I think setting the value to 0 is good enough; it can truly hide the function without making it too complicated.

 

[RunRudolf]

English isn't my native language, so my understanding might be a bit inaccurate.

Do you mean 0.000001f for 10-6?

If it's a numerical value, I saw that line in the code.： if (width == 0.000001f) continue...

If you're referring to the visual aspect, when someone has thick, long, black pubic hair and wears light-colored underwear like white, the black granular outline of the pubic hair is visible.（screenshot; you may need to zoom in to see it.）

If the numerical value can be set to 0g or 0 without affecting functionality, then I think there's no visual problem. Currently, after modifying your code, I haven't noticed any visual anomalies.
I think setting the value to 0 is good enough; it can truly hide the function without making it too complicated.

OK thanks, I see the black dots, particularly in the area between the legs in the air, which looks strange.
I am already working on a new version which manipulates the three "length" values instead of "width", also allowing zero length. This should both fix the issue you found, but also allowing for more flexibility to just have shorter pubic hair when wearing certain clothing items. There are many clothing items which are partly exposed, and these will benefit from extended flexibility going beyond just making the pubic hair completely invisible. Stay tuned for the next release version, and thank you for your input!

 

[RunRudolf]

Do you mean 0.000001f for 10-6?

Yes, 10-6 = 0.000001.

 

[RunRudolf]

RunRudolf updated Nipple & Pubic Hair Clipping Eliminator with a new update entry:

More Flexibility With Pubic Hair

View attachment 565299
Credits: Top row, from left to right: 'Shorts_BM_Open' by VL_13, 'Heat Up Panty' by MeshedVR, lower row, from left to right: 'Micro Bikini Panty' by Midkkola, 'Virgin Destroyer Panties' by Yaneks, 'DoA Bikini Bottom' by GenericMale51, all on default VaM model

• Instead of manipulating the hair "width" value, the plugin now influences the three hair "length" values.
• There is a new slider to determine a proportional pubic hair...

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[Hideki_Kgemaya]

RunRudolf updated Nipple & Pubic Hair Clipping Eliminator with a new update entry:

Improved Performance, Better Detection



Read the rest of this update entry...

The black particles are gone after the update, thank you very much.

However, there seems to be another problem; sometimes it works fine, and sometimes it doesn't.

I suspect that if a character without pubic hair is loaded, and then a character with pubic hair is loaded, it will stop working.

 

[RunRudolf]

The black particles are gone after the update, thank you very much.

However, there seems to be another problem; sometimes it works fine, and sometimes it doesn't.

I suspect that if a character without pubic hair is loaded, and then a character with pubic hair is loaded, it will stop working.

Hi, please describe in detail which steps lead to the observed issue. E.g. what do you mean by "loaded"? New saved scene, or adding a secomd person atom?
It has become fairly complex to properly manage all the possible situations with scene saving, loading, plugin reloading, atom add/remove etc., with/without hair and with/without clothing.

 

[Hideki_Kgemaya]

Hi, please describe in detail which steps lead to the observed issue. E.g. what do you mean by "loaded"? New saved scene, or adding a secomd person atom?
It has become fairly complex to properly manage all the possible situations with scene saving, loading, plugin reloading, atom add/remove etc., with/without hair and with/without clothing.

I apologize for not providing sufficient detail.

My testing results are as follows:
In the same scene, with the same Person, loading an Appearance without pubic hair, and then loading an Appearance with pubic hair and clothing that needs to hide the pubic hair, results in a failure.

Both Appearances are VAM's default Appearances. There are no additional customizations; the only difference is that one has no hair and no clothing, while the other has pubic hair and underwear.

 

[RunRudolf]

I apologize for not providing sufficient detail.

My testing results are as follows:
In the same scene, with the same Person, loading an Appearance without pubic hair, and then loading an Appearance with pubic hair and clothing that needs to hide the pubic hair, results in a failure.

Both Appearances are VAM's default Appearances. There are no additional customizations; the only difference is that one has no hair and no clothing, while the other has pubic hair and underwear.

No problem, thanks for describing the situation. I will test it on my end and fix it if I can locate the problem. I expect it is failing to trigger the cache refresh under these circumstances (and it should do that), but give me some time to investigate it. Thanks!