I'm trying to programmatically find a way to accomplish the following and would appreciate any assistance:
Starting with a Photoshop PSD image like this [with three layers: (1) Text, (2) Pattern, (3) Background]:
The code should delete any graphical element beneath the text layer that is within the total x/y rectangular footprint of the text layer. However, the difficult part is, the complete objects should be deleted, not just the parts of the objects immediately below the text rectangle.
Here is an example of what is NOT the desired result (because this results in partial objects being deleted [parts of the chess pieces]):
Rather, the end result should look like this [the complete chess pieces are deleted, even though they extent beyond the bounds of text layer]:
Thank you very much for any assistance.
Related
I am attempting to come up with a quick and efficient means of translating a 3d mesh into a projected AABB. In the end, I would like to accomplish something similar to figure 1 wherein only the area of the screen covered by the cube is located inside the bounding box highlighted in red. ((if it is at all possible, getting the area as small as possible, highlighted in blue, would increase efficiency down the road.))
Figure 1. https://i.imgur.com/pd0E20C.png
Currently, I have tried:
Calculating the point position on the screen using camera.unproject_position(). this failed largely due to my inability to wrap my head around the pixel positions trending towards infinity. I understand it has something to do with Tan, but frankly, it is too late for my brain to function anymore.
Getting the area of collision between the view frustum and the AABB of the mesh instance. This method seems convoluted, and to get it in a usable format I would need to project the result into 2d coordinates again.
Using the MeshInstance VisualInstance to create a texture wherein a pixel is white if it contains the mesh instance, and black otherwise. Visual instances in general just baffle me, and I did not think it would be efficient to have another viewport just to output this texture.
What I am looking for:
An output that can be passed to a shader informing where to complete certain calculations. Right now this is set up to use a bounding box, but it could easily be rewritten to also use a texture. It also could be rewritten to use polygons, but I am trying to keep calculations to a minimum in the shader.
Certain solutions I have tried before have worked, slightly, but this must be robust. The camera interfacing with the 3d object will be able to move completely around and through it, meaning at times the view will be completely surrounded by the 3d model with points both in front, and behind.
Thank you for any help you can provide.
I will try my best to update this post with information if needed.
I'm searching for a methods of text recognition based on document borders.
Or the methods that can solve the problem of finding new viewpoint.
For exmp. the camera is in point (x1,y1,z1) and the result picture with perspective distortions, but we can find (x2,y2,z2) for camera to correct picture.
Thanks.
The usual approach, which assumes that the document's page is approximately flat in 3D space, is to warp the quadrangle encompassing the page into a rectangle. To do so you must estimate a homography, i.e. a (linear) projective transformation between the original image and its warped counterpart.
The estimation requires matching points (or lines) between the two images, and a common choice for documents is to map the page corners in the original images to the image corners of the warped image. This will in general produce a rectangle with an incorrect aspect ratio (i.e. the warped page will look "wider" or "taller" than the real one), but this can be easily corrected if you happen to know in advance what the real aspect ratio is (for example, because you know the type of paper used, whether letter, A4, etc.).
A simple algorithm to perform the estimation is the so-called Direct Linear Transformation.
The OpenCV library contains routines to help accomplishing all these tasks, look into it.
I have a limited area (screen) populated with a few moving objects (3-20 of them, so it's not like 10.000 :). Those objects should be moving with a constant speed and into random direction. But, there are a few limitation to it:
objects shouldn't exit the area - so if it's close to the edge, it should move away from it
objects shouldn't bump onto each other - so when one is close to another one it should move away (but not get too close to different one).
On the image below I have marked the allowed moves in this situation - for example object D shouldn't move straight up, as it would bring it to the "wall".
What I would like to have is a way to move them (one by one). Is there any simple way to achieve it, without too much calculations?
The density of objects in the area would be rather low.
There are a number of ways you might programmatically enforce your desired behavior, given that you have such a small number of objects. However, I'm going to suggest something slightly different.
What if you ran the whole thing as a physics simulation? For instance, you could set up a Box2D world with no gravity, no friction, and perfectly elastic collisions. You could model your enclosed region and populate it with objects that are proportionally larger than their on-screen counterparts so that the on-screen versions never get too close to each other (because the underlying objects in the physics simulation will collide and change direction before that can happen), and assign each object a random initial position and velocity.
Then all you have to do is step the physics simulation, and map its current state into your UI. All the tricky stuff is handled for you, and the result will probably be more believable/realistic than what you would get by trying to come up with your own movement algorithm (or if you wanted it to appear more random and less believable, you could also just periodically apply a random impulse to a random object to keep things changing unpredictably).
You can use the hitTest: method of UIView
UIView* touchedView=[self.superview hitTest:currentOrigin withEvent:nil];
In This method you have to pass the current origin of the ball and in second argument you can pass nil.
that method will return the view with which the ball is hited.
If there is any hit view you just change the direction of the ball.
for border you can set the condition for the frame of the ball if the ball go out of the boundary just change the direction of the ball.
This question is very similar to that posed here.
My problem is that I have a map, something like this:
This map is made using 2D Perlin noise, and then running through the created heightmap assigning types and color values to each element in the terrain based on the height or the slope of the corresponding element, so pretty standard. The map array is two dimensional and the exact dimensions of the screen size (pixel-per-pixel), so at 1200 by 800 generation takes about 2 seconds on my rig.
Now zooming in on the highlighted rectangle:
Obviously with increased size comes lost detail. And herein lies the problem. I want to create additional detail on the fly, and then write it to disk as the player moves around (the player would simply be a dot restricted to movement along the grid). I see two approaches for doing this, and the first one that came to mind I quickly implemented:
This is a zoomed-in view of a new biased local terrain created from a sampled element of the old terrain, which is highlighted by the yellow grid space (to the left of center) in the previous image. However this system would require a great deal of modification, as, for example, if you move one unit left and up of the yellow grid space, onto the beach tile, the terrain changes completely:
So for that to work properly you'd need to do an excessive amount of, I guess the word would be interpolation, to create a smooth transition as the player moved the 40 or so grid-spaces in the local world required to reach the next tile over in the over world. That seems complicated and very inelegant.
The second approach would be to break up the grid of the original map into smaller bits, maybe dividing each square by 4? I haven't implemented this and I'm not sure how I would in a way that would actually increase detail, but I think that would probably end up being the best solution.
Any ideas on how I could approach this? Keep in mind it has to be local and on-the-fly. Just increasing the resolution of the map is something I want to avoid at all costs.
Rewrite your Perlin noise to be a function of position. Then you can increase the octaves (and thus the detail level) and resample the area at a higher resolution.
Remember MS Paint? The bucket tool? If you used it and clicked on a pixel, all pixels connected to this pixel that are the same are affected. The theory is, I suppose, to check if there is any pixel adjacent to the selected one. If such pixel is the same type as the selected one, check for more adjacent pixels in this one, and so on.
I want to implement something similar in VB.NET. Basically I have a 2D array map which represents the map. Let's assume there are only two types of tile: 0 and 1.
Now, I got pretty much everything ready: I got my 2d map and I can tell which tile is clicked and tell what array indexes are the ones that represent such tile.
Now for the "painting" process. Whenever I think about it, I can't figure a convenient way to execute such iteration. Can someone help me choosing a correct design/way/tip to achieve this?
The operation is called 'flood fill'. Possible algorithms and their implementations, there are several, are well described here.