I have polygons features on a Mapbox map. Their sizes vary a lot (some are big as streets, others are as little as a tree).
Each polygon has an a point feature on it (a circle) that acts as an handle to open a popup related to the polygon data.
But depending on the zoom level, the circle/point is sometimes bigger than the polygon itself; since the polygon "sticks" to the map while the circle size remains unchanged.
What I would like to achieve is to hide the polygon (and its handle) if the polygon size in pixels is smaller than the circle :
when zoom changes
get the size in pixels of a bouding box containing the polygon
compare it to the size of the circle
hide both of them if circle radius > polygon smaller side.
I think I'm capable of coding this, but then... how can I hide the features ?
There is a minzoom / maxzoom setting for sources and layers, but how can I achieve this per-feature ?
Thanks!
Within the Style Specification, there's no way to access a feature's size. https://docs.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl-js/style-spec/
How many features do you have on your map? Is it possible to precompute the size of the feature and use that to style when it's visible?
Related
I made a mesh from a Digital Elevation Map that spanned 1x1 degree box of geography, but when I scale the mesh up to 11139m in blender I get these visible jagged shadows on the peaks of the mesh. I'd prefer to not scale everything down but I suppose I can, it just seems like a strange issue I want to better understand.
My goal is to use the landscape in a WebVR application, but when I put this mesh into an Aframe scene it also has this issue. Thanks for any tips!
Quick answer:
I think this may be caused by the clipping start/end values. Also called near/far clipping planes. Adjusting them may fix the issue but also limit the rendering distance.
Longer explanation:
Take a look at this:
It's a simple grayscale, but imagine it is scaled across your entire scene depth (Z depth buffer). The range of this buffer is set by the start/stop clipping (near/far) camera setting.
By default Blender has its start/stop (near/far) clipping set to 0.01 - 1000.
While A-Frame has it like 0.005 - 10000. You may find more information here: A-Frame camera #properties
That means the renderer has to somehow fit every single point in that range somewhere on the grayscale. That may cause overlapping or Z-fighting because it is simply lacking precision to distinguish the details. And that is mainly visible at edges/peaks because the polygons are connected there at acute angles and the program has to round up the Z-values. That causes overlapping visible as darker shadows (most likely the backside of the polygon behind).
You may also want to read more about Z-fighting because it is somewhat related.
Example
VB2010 I am using the DataVisualization.Charting.Chart control and am using it as a very crude map of several geographic points. I have that working and it looks good but am trying to see about adding an image to the chart so that it would simulate the land masses. The problem I see is that I zoom around the chart programmatically, so not sure how i can anchor the image to certain x,y coordinates. I don't want to go the whole GIS component as those types of controls are just too much for this fairly simple app.
Update: Well I sort of resolved it. I generated a full world map based on the WGS84 (some would call geographic) projection. This splits the world into perfect 20d x 20d squares. I added this graphic to the BackImage property of my main Chart. I add my points but force the extents of the graph to x: -180 to 180 and y: -90 to 90. Its crude but its actually spot on for my purposes. The only thing that i cant do is zoom in to my points of interest as the background image is static. I wish there was a way to zoom the background image to anchor parts of the image to coordinates on the graph.
I am facing this problem while trying to rotate the map in my iPhone app
The view gets clipped and rotation also happens. I want to avoid the clipping. Any tips ?
heres the code:
viewToRotate.layer.transform = CATransform3DMakeRotation(0.8, 0., 0., 1.);
You need your map rotated in 3D ? If not (which is what I think you need), then just use CGAffineTransformMakeRotation (be careful, as it requires the angle in radians).
Also, if you don't want your map to be clipped, you need to make your map bigger, like in the image below (open in new tab to see it bigger)
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4498/calculatemapboundswhenr.png
First, you need to calculate the diagonal of the rectangle (your visible map) as instructed in the image above (which I call "radius" because that would be the radius of the smallest circle bigger than your rectangle).
Second, using the radius, you need to calculate the (smallest) square that will allow your map to be seen without clipping. This square will be used to set the bounds of your map (caution: NOT the frame - Apple specifies that, when using rotation, you should not use frame - just bounds and / or center).
Make sure this square is centered on the center of your visible map rectangle (i.e. the square should have X pixels above AND below the small rectangle ... and Y pixels left AND right of the small rectangle).
Hope it helps !
Did you ever figure out the solution?
The only way I could do it was to make the MapView in Interface Builder much bigger than the actual size of the screen area its supposed to cover, then I centered the MapView such that its center was in the center of the narrower viewable area.
Rotation seemed to work similarly to how it works in the built-in Maps app.
My guess is that you have to do this so that the image tiles streaming in from Google cover a wide enough area to "fill in the blanks" so to speak, even if they're not always visable.
If you apply a little math, you could probably programmatically size and position the MapView such that you void clipping, but don't require more tiles than is absolutely necessary.
I have created an experimental fast rectangular object tracking system; it will be used for headtracking and controllling objects in 3D engine (Ogre3D).
For now I am able to show to the webcam any kind of bright colored rectangle (text markers are good objects) and system registers basic properties of this object (hue/value/lightness and initial width and height in 0 degrees rotation).
After I have registered the trackable object, I do some simple frame processing to create grayscale probabilty map.
So now I have 2 known things:
1) 4 corners for the last object position (it's always a rectangle but it may be rotated)
2) a pretty rectangular (but still far from perfect) blob which is the brightest in the frame. I can get coordinates of any point of the blob without problems, point detection is stable enough.
I can find a bounding rectangle of the object without problems, but I have a problem with detecting the object corners themselves.
I need the simplest possible (quick&dirty would be great) algorithm to scan the image starting with some known coordinates (a point inside the blob) and detect new 4 x,y coordinates of a "blobish" rectangle corners (not corners of a bounding box but corners of the rectangular blob itself).
Ready-to-use C++ function would be awesome, but somehow google doesn't like me today :(
I think that it would be overkill to use some complicated function form OpenCV library just to extract 4 points of a single rectanglular blob. But if you know a quick and efficient way how to do it using OpenCV (it must be real-time and light on CPU because I'll run the 3D engine at the same time) then I would be really grateful.
You can apply Hough transform on segmented image to detect lines. Using detected lines you can calculate their intersection to find the corner coordinates of the blob.
I'm using a 3d engine and need to translate between 3d world space and 2d screen space using perspective projection, so I can place 2d text labels on items in 3d space.
I've seen a few posts of various answers to this problem but they seem to use components I don't have.
I have a Camera object, and can only set it's current position and lookat position, it cannot roll. The camera is moving along a path and certain target object may appear in it's view then disappear.
I have only the following values
lookat position
position
vertical FOV
Z far
Z near
and obviously the position of the target object.
Can anyone please give me an algorithm that will do this using just these components?
Many thanks.
all graphics engines use matrices to transform between different coordinats systems. Indeed OpenGL and DirectX uses them, because they are the standard way.
Cameras usually construct the matrices using the parameters you have:
view matrix (transform the world to position in a way you look at it from the camera position), it uses lookat position and camera position (also the up vector which usually is 0,1,0)
projection matrix (transforms from 3D coordinates to 2D Coordinates), it uses the fov, near, far and aspect.
You could find information of how to construct the matrices in internet searching for the opengl functions that create them:
gluLookat creates a viewmatrix
gluPerspective: creates the projection matrix
But I cant imagine an engine that doesnt allow you to get these matrices, because I can ensure you they are somewhere, the engine is using it.
Once you have those matrices, you multiply them, to get the viewprojeciton matrix. This matrix transform from World coordinates to Screen Coordinates. So just multiply the matrix with the position you want to know (in vector 4 format, being the 4ยบ component 1.0).
But wait, the result will be in homogeneous coordinates, you need to divide X,Y,Z of the resulting vector by W, and then you have the position in Normalized screen coordinates (0 means the center, 1 means right, -1 means left, etc).
From here it is easy to transform multiplying by width and height.
I have some slides explaining all this here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13crrSCPonJcxAjGaS5HJOat3MpE0lmEtqxeVr4tVLDs/present?slide=id.i0
Good luck :)
P.S: when you work with 3D it is really important to understand the three matrices (model, view and projection), otherwise you will stumble every time.
so I can place 2d text labels on items
in 3d space
Have you looked up "billboard" techniques? Sometimes just knowing the right term to search under is all you need. This refers to polygons (typically rectangles) that always face the camera, regardless of camera position or orientation.