I am plotting meteor observation data from a sky camera, sometimes using right ascension and declination for my x and y axes, at other times azimuth and elevation. The problem I have in both cases is with the x axis when my observations span the 360 degree mark. Sometimes I get a batch of observations on the left of my plot (near zero degrees, and a batch on the right hand side (near 360 degrees), with a big expanse of nothing in the middle. Is there any easy way I can change the x axis so that the 360/0 degree wrap over is in the centre of the plot? I would still want to show the true azimuth (or right ascension) in the axis labels.
PS. Pointing the camera elsewhere is not an option ]1
PPS So in the image shown the plots on the left hand side should be to the right of those on the right hand side with x axis from 250 (via 360/0) to 100.
PPPS So the second image shows what I am after - but I got to that by doctoring the data - as is obvious from the scale of the x axis in this plot
Related
I have a data set “mydatainR”
With that I created a barplot and when I download the barplot, part of the y axis is cut off because it’s “off of the paper”
I want to give myself more room to work with, or make my entire bar plot smaller. Thx
When you make a line profile of all x-values or all y-values the extraction from each pixel is clear. But when you take a line profile along a diagonal, how does DM choose which pixels to use in the one dimensional readout?
Not really a scripting question, but I'm rather certain that it uses bi-linear interpolation between the grid-points along the drawn line. (And if perpendicular integration is enabled, it does so in an integral.) It's the same interpolation you would get for a "rotate" image.
In fact, you can think of it as a rotate-image (bi-linearly interpolated) with a 'cut-out' afterwards, potentially summed/projected onto the new X-axis.
Here is an example
Assume we have a 5 x 4 image, which gives the grid as shown below.
I'm drawing top-left corners to indicate the coordinates system pixel convention used in DigitalMicrgraph, where
(x/y)=(0/0) is the top-left corner of the image
Now extract a LineProfile from (1/1) to (4/3). I have highlighted the pixels for those coordinates.
Note, that a Line drawn from the corners seems to be shifted by half-a-pixel from what feels 'natural', but that is the consequence of the top-left-corner convention. I think, this is why a LineProfile-Marker is shown shifted compared to f.e. LineAnnotations.
In general, this top-left corner convention makes schematics with 'pixels' seem counter-intuitive. It is easier to think of the image simply as grid with values in points at the given coordinates than as square pixels.
Now the maths.
The exact profile has a length of:
As we can only have profiles with integer channels, we actually extract a LineProfile of length = 4, i.e we round up.
The angle of the profile is given by the arc-tangent of dX and dY.
So to extract the profile, we 'rotate' the grid by that angle - done by bilinear interpolation - and then extract the profile as grid of size 4 x 1:
This means the 'values' in the profile are from the four points:
Which are each bi-linearly interpolated values from four closest points of the original image:
In case the LineProfile is averaged over a certain width W, you do the same thing but:
extract a 2D grid of size L x W centered symmetrically over the line.i.e. the grid is shifted by (W-1)/2 perpendicular to the profile direction.
sum the values along W
I'm just curious because im making a game, at least trying. And i have a little ship, and of course if its moving at a speed of 1 pixel per tick of a timer (16ms (60fps)) and its facing straight up it's Y axis movement is just 1 pixel per tick and X axis is 0... But if its rotated 5 degrees clockwise, its Y axis movement would need to be (1/18 * 17) and X axis would need to be (1/18)... and that would mean the ship is supposed to be moving upwards at about 0.95 pixels per tick and right at about 0.05 pixels per tick, which it obviously cant do because you cant have less than 1 of a pixel... Is there another way i haven't thought of? And did I explain that well, does it make sense?
Thanks to #Martheen
"Maintain the real position elsewhere and only calculate the actual pixel position when rendering. This way after a few frames or so it will move, like watching a radar screen or slowed-down video – Martheen"
I drew a perfect large square in canvas and then split that large square into 15x15 smaller squares.
Now I am moving a bitmap using an image along X and Y Axis. The bitmap is of same size as the smaller square.
It moves along X axis perfectly one square at a time. But it covers more than one square along Y axis. So I have to multiply by approximately 0.93 to get to the size of the smaller square. But the problem is that it gets more complicated with different devices cellphone vs tablet.
Does anybody know why Y axis is different from X axis?
Thank you in advance...
Most of the displays have a slightly different densities between the X and Y axis, using my device and running the following command:
adb shell dumpsys display
searching for "density", I got the result:
PhysicalDisplayInfo{1080 x 2280, 60.000004 fps, density 3.0, 442.451 x 438.727 dpi, secure true, appVsyncOffset 0, bufferDeadline 17666666}
Depending on how you're declaring your square that may be the cause.
I've been having a bit of a problem with making the Y axis my up axis when exporting mesh and scenes from Blender. Both Blender and my export target use right handed transformation matrices. Z is the up axis in Blender while Y is the up axis in my target. The problem exists in 2 places though. The scene's transformations can't just be shifted on the X axis to fix this, because I also need to do the Y/Z switch for the vertices in the mesh (export as vertex.x, vertex.z, vertex.y). I need to have the actual Y and Z rotations switched, so that if the Y and Z rotations are the same, no change will occur (ie. identity). Thanks for your help in advance. Feel free to ask questions if I was not thorough enough.
Blender does two things different than the rest of the known world!
1. It uses Z axis for vertical (should be Y); Y axis for horizontal (should b X); and X axis for in and out (should b Z).
Very weird! Every high school graph since the beginning of time uses X for horizontal and Y for vertical.
It uses the right mouse button for selections.
U can change the selection btn in Preferences, but not the crazy axis arrangement!
no,
you do this
y=z
z=-y
no rotation of 90 degrees can make you go from left to right hand.
I ran into a similar issue when working with cinema4d and blender. In cinema4d Y is the up axis and rotations are heading,pitch and bank.
Blender's system looks like a right handed system, but rotated by 90 degrees on x axis.
I did the same thing for coordinates(exported as vertex.x,vertex.z,vertex.y). For rotations,
I think you should add 90 degrees(math.pi * 0.5) for rotations on X axis and the rest should be fine.
HTH
Have you tried just using Select All (the 'a' key) and then r x 90 to rotate everything 90 degrees around the X axis and the pivot point? (your pivot point is choosable in the menu bar of the 3D view if you need to control that).
You could do that, export, and then undo.
Just Download Wings3D. Export from Blender as .3ds and then Import this file in Wings3D.
Now you can just export it from Wings3D, again to .3ds. But instead of clicking directly on .3ds, click on the small icon in the right of the ".3ds" menu. now you can unchecked the Box Swap y und z axis and import the .3ds in another program.
There is no way that would be possible. Coordinate system was innately selected as hard coded from the blender source and there are no explicit option has been made in blender to switch it. It would also affected many of the hard coded functionality of any function blender was used or has been made by assume that coordinate
However, in theory, it would be possible to access blender source code and rebuild the blender to have it use another coordinate we would like. Albeit we need to carefully swap everything related to coordinate system
I too wish that left handed coordinate system (as of Unity3D) would be industrial standard and blender should at least have another version that work in left handed coordinate. People should just graduated from table coordinate to screen coordinate already
In blender, you could add empty plain axes, that will correct your orientation when exporting to unity, or try exporting as fbx file and change orientation in export options