One of the limitations with iStripper is that it lacks a sense of scale. The models looks great, but you have no sense for how big or small they are compared to a man.

Recently, I tried running a virtuaguy model with an iStripper model on small size to see if it would give a sense of scale. And I think it works quite well.

I know many will not be interested in having a sense of scale. But for those who do, Virtuguy models may provide an opportunity.

But few of us are interested. In fact I am sometimes puzzled to read the "stats" of the ladies vs the comments that are made... I do not have any precise example in mind but I remember once one girl being said "super tall" and she was something like 1,50m height in the stats... 😳

Well I know the stats are wrong sometimes.

Also I sometimes wonder if the videos of the various models are not "normalized" in terms of height because some models are small and they look the same height as some models that are tall... 😳 again.

But few of us are interested. In fact I am sometimes puzzled to read the "stats" of the ladies vs the comments that are made... I do not have any precise example in mind but I remember once one girl being said "super tall" and she was something like 1,50m height in the stats... 😳Well I know the stats are wrong sometimes.Also I sometimes wonder if the videos of the various models are not "normalized" in terms of height because some models are small and they look the same height as some models that are tall... 😳 again.

The models are "scaled" with the aim of providing a consistently sized image on your screen.

@Wyldanimal can give the detailed, technical explanation of this.

Look at this screen capture, with 4 totally random models played in the same time, from left to right:

• Kristine Crystalis: 1,69 m
• Holly Anderson: 1,77 m
• Sharka Blue: 1,58 m
• Katty: 1,72 m

They do not stand absolutely in the same exact position but the difference between the smalled and the taller is 19 cm... almost one head... can you see that ? 😳

So my only guess is that the video sizes are normalized and then no scaling is possible.

@pickle1 thank you for your confirmation! 👍

So two consequences:

• my eyes are still ok 😎
• no scaling possible ⛔

The recording equipment is Framed, Prior to the Shoot
So that Each model is Framed the Same.
From what I understand
The Model Puts her hands up in the air, and the framing is set so to get all of her hands in the frame.

Sometimes they don't get it quite right.
There is also the Issue of the Model not stay on the proper Line.
If she moves away from the camera, she gets shorter
If she moves forward to the camera she gets taller

Many Pole Clips Illustrate this, as she walks around the Pole.

The Studio is Not so Big, so that this little Movement Forward or Back makes a difference.

So yes, as much as they have tried to keep the Model Height Consistent
We see technical / human errors and variance shows up.

The variation in size caused by the model being in front of the pole or behind the pole
is enough to lose half her head for much of the time in close up pole fullscreen scenes.
Wish I had known this when setting 'standingheight' parameters in the early scene
writing days.

The absolutely best way to experience iStripper, is without a doubt VR! The VR shows allow you to see just how petite and curvy these gorgeous ladies really are! ✌🐱💗😎

Whether the idea is useful is dependant on what your objective is.

My basic objective is to be able to see a female model dancing alongside a male so that I can get a sense of her height. For that, all I need is for the male to look bigger than the female. What I am not trying to do us get an actual representation of the actual or relative heights of the models.

In my experimentations, I have found that in most cases the virtuaguys are bigger than the females. But it can vary, and the variation does not depend on actual size of the models.

I'm just saying that if sense of scale is of interest, using virtuaguy is an option to achieve this. But if anyone does not need this or wants to see the real relative heights, then there is no point in trying this.

Also if anyone does not like the idea of having virtuaguys on your screen or in your collection, I feel that is a valid position to take and thus, this suggestion is not for you.

As for VR, well that is of course a very interesting way to experience things and I would love to try it, but I don't feel it can be compared to what I am suggesting. We are basically comparing a few dollars in buying some virtyaguys to paying several hundred dollars to experience VR. Unfortunately I am not in a poition to invest in or use VR. So that is currently not an option for me.

Even simpler and cheaper is to use a fullscreen scene featuring something to give an idea of the scale of things put into it - e.g. a room.

Even simpler ... is to use a fullscreen scene

Yes, exactly

You can Create a Playlist of the Girls you want.
and then Disable all of your Collection
Then Enable just the guys you want.

The Scene would use two Actors.
The First actor the Girl, would be Selected from the playlist
the Second Actor, the Guy would be Selected from ALL Enabled Cards.

That would be an Easy way to Always Have one Girl, and One Guy.

If you Wanted More than One Girl, and Only one GUY

Switch things around
Make the Playlist of the Guys.
Disable ALL the GUY cards
and Enable ALL the Girls you Want to Use

Then the Scene
the First Actor would be the Guy, and Come from the Playlist
The Second and Third, Forth, Fifth ..... Actors would be Selected from the Enabled Girl Cards.

So then only One Guy, with Multiple Girls.

Edit:
The Scene also lets you Control the Height of Each Actor, so you can make sure the Guy is just a Bit Taller.

Edit:
The Scene also lets you Control the Height of Each Actor, so you can make sure the Guy is just a Bit Taller.[/quote]

I don't have any guys.
(Don't want them)

If I were to do this, I would scale the guy to be my height. How would I stand up next to the tall model? How would I stand up next to the short model?


I guess I could get a guy dancer and photo shop my face on this dancing body.....

I confess I struggle with the idea.

I can easily work out mentally how tall the girl is by the statistics and her body shape. I don't need to use an image of a man alongside to achieve that.

Plus - for me - iStripper is all about the fantasy - and none of my fantasies involve having a strange bloke in the room with his dick hanging out!

😆😆😆

@pickle1 said;

I confess I struggle with the idea.

I can easily work out mentally how tall the girl is by the statistics and her body shape. I don't need to use an image of a man alongside to achieve that.

Plus - for me - iStripper is all about the fantasy - and none of my fantasies involve having a strange bloke in the room with his dick hanging out!

😆😆😆

That's exactly where I was coming from..
💖✌😎

@Apasas said;

Whether the idea is useful is dependant on what your objective is.

My basic objective is to be able to see a female model dancing alongside a male so that I can get a sense of her height. For that, all I need is for the male to look bigger than the female. What I am not trying to do us get an actual representation of the actual or relative heights of the models.

In my experimentations, I have found that in most cases the virtuaguys are bigger than the females. But it can vary, and the variation does not depend on actual size of the models.

I'm just saying that if sense of scale is of interest, using virtuaguy is an option to achieve this. But if anyone does not need this or wants to see the real relative heights, then there is no point in trying this.

Also if anyone does not like the idea of having virtuaguys on your screen or in your collection, I feel that is a valid position to take and thus, this suggestion is not for you.

As for VR, well that is of course a very interesting way to experience things and I would love to try it, but I don't feel it can be compared to what I am suggesting. We are basically comparing a few dollars in buying some virtyaguys to paying several hundred dollars to experience VR. Unfortunately I am not in a poition to invest in or use VR. So that is currently not an option for me.

Fair enough, I totally get where you're coming from. Also, My Oculus Go was $200.00 USD..well worth it.
✌❤️😎