I placed a standard Camera in front of a moving Actor. When I set the current view to this camera I noticed a strange behaviour: If the actor get really close to another object on the scenario (a default cube) it disappear from the view. It looks like the camera is getting into the cube. I'm pretty sure the camera is not colliding with the cube because the actor has a couple of bumpers that prevent the side where the camera is placed to collide with other objects and the whole camera mesh is placed fully 'inside' the actor. The problem maybe is related with the size of the actor that's about 40cm x 30cm x 10cm. The observed cube is 1mt x 1mt x 1mt, the minimum distance of camera from cube is around 3 cm.
Sounds to me like you're experiencing an issue with an object passing your camera's "clipping plane." In the 3D world, this is simply just draw distance minimum and maximum values. For more information on what you are experiencing, check out this brilliant explanation by Autodesk: https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/maya/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2018/ENU/Maya-Rendering/files/GUID-D69C23DA-ECFB-4D95-82F5-81118ED41C95-htm.html
Now, let's fix the issue! In Unreal Engine, it's super easy. Go into your Project Settings/General Settings. There is a value called Near Clip Plane, which simply changes the minimum clipping value for Camera components. I would bet making this value smaller will fix your issue! For a visual representation, check out this tutorial by Kyle Dail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO79qxNnOfU
Related
I use godot to create my 3d game. I ran into a problem while creating portals using camera viewport rendering to texture. The problem is that the camera captures unnecessary objects that are behind portal. I partially solved this problem by setting the parameter "near " for the camera at a distance from the camera itself to the portal, but the part behind the portal began to be cut off.
The question is, is it possible to hide objects for a particular camera so that other cameras can see them? Perhaps there is another way to do this, for example by creating a static clipping plane?
Proximity Fade
Probably not what you are looking for, but I'll mention it for completeness sake.
The default material has proximity fade and distance fade, which you can use to make the material disappear if it is too close or to distant from the camera, respectively.
It is important to note that this is not a cull plane, and that the fading is gradual.
Thus, using proximity fade you can make objects near the camera appear semitransparent.
Using Visibility layers and cull mask
is it possible to hide objects for a particular camera so that other cameras can see them?
Every VisualInstance (you know, all things that are visible in 3D) has layers. And every Camera has a cull_mask. If the cull_mask of the Camera does not include any of the layers of a VisualInstance, then the Camera does not see that VisualInstance.
A VisualInstance with no layers will not show on no Camera, even if the Camera has all the layers in its cull_mask (which is the default).
You can either edit the cull_mask of the camera to not include the layers of the VisualInstance, or edit the layers of the VisualInstance, or both.
Using a custom shader cull plane
Perhaps there is another way to do this, for example by creating a static clipping plane?
You can use a custom spatial shader to cut things out based on a plane.
You need to define the plane as a uniforms. For this answer I'll use a point-normal definition of a plane:
n·(r - r_0)
That is:
dot(plane_normal, (world_position - plane_point)
Thus, we define a plane_normal and plane_point uniforms:
uniform vec3 plane_normal;
uniform vec3 plane_point;
The plane_normal gives us the orientation of the plane, while the plane_point is a point on the plane which allows us to position it.
And then use this logic:
vec3 wold_position = (CAMERA_MATRIX * vec4(VERTEX, 1.0)).xyz;
ALPHA = clamp(sign(dot(plane_normal, wold_position - plane_point)), 0.0, 1.0);
Here we are converting the coordinates of the current point to world space, and then using definition of the plane to find the points on one side (using sign), and set ALPHA based on that, such that everything on one side of the plane becomes invisible.
Note: This is not the only way to define the plane. Another popular definition is a 4D vector, where the xyz are the normal, and the w is the distance from plane to the origin.
Sadly, I don't think there is a way to make this work with multiple material passes, because ALPHA controls the blending of the passes, and will not result in transparency. And no, using discard; does not solve it either, because the other passes can write the fragment regardless. Thus, you are going to need to modify your materials to include that.
Further Sadly Godot 3.x does not support global uniforms (see Godot 4.0 gets global and per-instance shader uniforms). Which means you will have to set these parameter everywhere you need them.
Using Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG)
Add a CSGCombiner make the geometry that needs to disappear with other CSG nodes as children.
Then you can, for example, add a CSGSphere with operation set to "Subtraction", and move it with the Camera (for this purpose, I suggest to add a RemoteTransform node as child to the Camera and set its remote path to the CSGSphere).
Of course, it does not have to be a CSGSphere, you can use any CSG nodes for this purpose. For the portal, I imagine you could use a CSGBox and align it to the portal plane.
Note: Currently on Godot 3.3 CSG nodes do not support baking lights. This is a regression. See: Unable to bake lightmap with CSG due to the lack of ability to generate UV2 for CSG nodes.
Portals, actually
Bartleby Lawnjelly has a portal (godot-lportal) module for Godot 3.x.
Being a module, they require to build Godot from source. See Compiling on the official Godot documentation. It is not that bad, I promise. Or use build from godot-titan.
I have to explain that these portals are not portals in the Valve Portal video game series sense… The module lets you define areas as "rooms", and planes as "portals" that connect those rooms, in such way that you can look from one to the other. The purpose of this is to cull entire rooms unless you are looking through one of the portals.
Hopefully that makes more sense with a video. This is a somewhat old one, but good to get the idea across: Portal rendering module in Godot 3.2 - Improved performance. Seeing shadow pooping in the video? Bartleby Lawnjelly also has a custom lightmapper.
First off, I am not sure if this is the right place so I apologize if this belongs elsewhere - please let me know if it does. I am currently doing some prototyping with this in VB so that's why I come here first.
My Goal
I am trying to make a program to be able to log different types of information for a video game that I play. I would like to be able to map out the entire game with my program and add locations for mobs, resources, etc.
What I have
The in game map can be downloaded so I have literally just stuck this in as a background image on the form (just for now). The map that I get downloaded though is not exactly as the map appears in the game though since the game will add extra water around everything when scrolling around. This makes it a bit tricky to match up where the origin for the map is in game compared to where it would be on the downloaded map.
The nice thing though is that while I am in the game I can print my current coordinates to the screen. So I thought that maybe I can somehow use this to get the right calculation for the rest of the points on the map.
Here is an example image I will refer to now:
In the above map you will see a dotted bounding box. This is an invisible box in the game where once you move your mouse out of the longitude and latitude points will no longer show. This is what I refer to above when I mean I can't find the exact point of origin for the in game map.
You will also see 2 points: A and B. In the game there are teleporters. This is what I would use to get the most accurate position possible. I am thinking I can find the position (in game) of point A and point B and then somehow calculate that into a conversion for my mouse drag event in VB.
In VB the screen starts at top-left and is 0,0. I did already try to get the 2 points like this and just add or subtract the number to the x and y pixel position of the mouse, but it didn't quite line up right.
So with all this information does anyone know if it is possible to write a lon/lat conversion to pixels based on this kind of data?
I appreciate any thoughts and suggestions and if you need any clarification of any information I have posted please let me know and I will be happy to expand on it. I am really hoping I can get this solved!
Thanks!
EDIT:
I also want to mention I am not sure if there is an exact pixel to lat/lon point for the in game map. I.e. the in game map could be 1 pixel = 100 latitude or something. So I might also need to figure out what that conversion number is?
Some clarifications about conversion between the pixel location to 'latitude and longitude'.
First the map in your game is in a geometry coordinate system, which means everything lies in 2D and you can measure the distance between two points by calculate the pixel position.
But when we talk about longitude and latitude, we are actually talking about a geography coordinate system, which is a '3D' model of the sphere oabout the surface of the earth. All the maps on earth are abstracted from 3D to 2D through one step called projection. Like google maps or your GPS. In this projection process, the 3D model converted to 2D model but there is always some part of the map will be tortured, so that same distance in pixels on a map could be different in length in reality.
So if you don't care about the accuracy then you can consider the geometry point as geography point. Otherwise, you need to implement some GIS library to handle the geodesic distance and calculate the geography point based on the projection coordinate system.
I may be making this harder than what it really is, but I am also pretty new to developing games. Currently I am making a practice scene to get back used to the unity engine as I have not had time to use it since last summer. My issue is that I can not figure out how to lift the camera in game mode. Notice my photo below, and how much of the "underground" is showing. I want to raise the camera to keep it at the very least a specific y axis value, so that I can make less of the ground visible, and more of the background visible. If I am over complicating this, please also let me know. Thank you
If main camera is still then just lift the camera in scene view you can see changes in game view.
Or if camera moves with respect to player then you have to use a script and attach it to camera and get a reference of player transform in the script and according to the player position change position of the camera. Add an offset value in y component of the camera.
When using Matrix.CreateTranslation(x,y,z) I get bizarre results. I have tested using fixed values, one variable at a time and have determined the following:
When altering the X coordinates, the model moves from the top left corner to the bottom right corner.
When altering the Y coordinates, the model moves up and down as it should.
I do not plan to alter the Z coordinates, but because of the nature of my program I can't figure out exactly what it does.
I have my model drawn. Rotation works fine. I am performing my translations in the correct order (at least I think): scale * rotation * translation.
I think the problem lies in my camera settings, but I have no idea exactly what the problem is. I am trying to create a top-down-style RTS camera.
Here are my camera settings:
campos = new Vector3(5000.0F, 5000.0F, 5000.0F)
effect.View = Matrix.CreateLookAt(campos, Vector3.Down, Vector3.Up)
I can provide more information as needed.
The second argument of Matrix.CreateLookAt is not the direction the camera is facing, but the targeted point.
If you try to make the camera look down, use
Matrix.CreateLookAt(campos, campos + Vector3.Down, Vector3.Forward)
This will tell the camera to always look at the point one unit below the camera.
Your translation probably doesn't work well because the camera is not looking at the point you want it to, and therefore looks like the model is moving diagonally.
I'm working on a fork of Pleasant3D.
When rotating an object being displayed the object always rotates around the same point relative to to itself even if that point is not at the center of the view (e.g. because the user has panned to move the object in the view).
I would like to change this so that the view always rotates the object around the point at the center of the view as it appears to the user instead of the center of the object.
Here is the core of the current code that rotates the object around its center (slightly simplified) (from here):
glLoadIdentity();
// midPlatform is the offset to reach the "middle" of the object (or more specifically the platform on which the object sits) in the x/y dimension.
// This the point around which the view is currently rotated.
Vector3 *midPlatform = [self.currentMachine calcMidBuildPlatform];
glTranslatef((GLfloat)cameraTranslateX - midPlatform.x,
(GLfloat)cameraTranslateY - midPlatform.y,
(GLfloat)cameraOffset);
// trackBallRotation and worldRotation come from trackball.h/c which appears to be
// from an Apple OpenGL sample.
if (trackBallRotation[0] != 0.0f) {
glRotatef (trackBallRotation[0], trackBallRotation[1], trackBallRotation[2], trackBallRotation[3]);
}
// accumlated world rotation via trackball
glRotatef (worldRotation[0], worldRotation[1], worldRotation[2], worldRotation[3]);
glTranslatef(midPlatform.x, midPlatform.y, 0.);
// Now draw object...
What transformations do I need to apply in what order to get the effect I desire?
Some of what I've tried so far
As I understand it this is what the current code does:
"OpenGL performs matrices multiplications in reverse order if multiple transforms are applied to a vertex" (from here). This means that the first transformation to be applied is actually the last one in the code above. It moves the center of the view (0,0) to the center of the object.
This point is then used as the center of rotation for the next two transformations (the rotations).
Finally the midPlatform translation is done in reverse to move the center back to the original location and the XY translations (panning) done by the user is applied. Here also the "camera" is moved away from the object to the proper location (indicated by cameraOffset).
This seems straightforward enough. So what I need to change is instead of translating the center of the view to the center of the object (midPlatform) I need to translate it to the current center of the view as seen by the user, right?
Unfortunately this is where the transformations start affecting each other in interesting ways and I am running into trouble.
I tried changing the code to this:
glLoadIdentity();
glTranslatef(0,
0,
(GLfloat)cameraOffset);
if (trackBallRotation[0] != 0.0f) {
glRotatef (trackBallRotation[0], trackBallRotation[1], trackBallRotation[2], trackBallRotation[3]);
}
// accumlated world rotation via trackball
glRotatef (worldRotation[0], worldRotation[1], worldRotation[2], worldRotation[3]);
glTranslatef(cameraTranslateX, cameraTranslateY, 0.);
In other words, I translate the center of the view to the previous center, rotate around that, and then apply the camera offset to move the camera away to the proper position. This makes the rotation behave exactly the way I want it to, but it introduces a new issue. Now any panning done by the user is relative to the object. For example if the object is rotated so that the camera is looking along the X axis end-on, if the user pans left to right the object appears to be moving closer/further from the user instead of left or right.
I think I can understand why the is (XY camera translations being applied before rotation), and I think what I need to do is figure out a way to cancel out the translation from before the rotation after the rotation (to avoid the weird panning effect) and then to do another translation which translates relative to the viewer (eye coordinate space) instead of the object (object coordinate space) but I'm not sure exactly how to do this.
I found what I think are some clues in the OpenGL FAQ(http://www.opengl.org/resources/faq/technical/transformations.htm), for example:
9.070 How do I transform my objects around a fixed coordinate system rather than the object's local coordinate system?
If you rotate an object around its Y-axis, you'll find that the X- and Z-axes rotate with the object. A subsequent rotation around one of these axes rotates around the newly transformed axis and not the original axis. It's often desirable to perform transformations in a fixed coordinate system rather than the object’s local coordinate system.
The root cause of the problem is that OpenGL matrix operations postmultiply onto the matrix stack, thus causing transformations to occur in object space. To affect screen space transformations, you need to premultiply. OpenGL doesn't provide a mode switch for the order of matrix multiplication, so you need to premultiply by hand. An application might implement this by retrieving the current matrix after each frame. The application multiplies new transformations for the next frame on top of an identity matrix and multiplies the accumulated current transformations (from the last frame) onto those transformations using glMultMatrix().
You need to be aware that retrieving the ModelView matrix once per frame might have a detrimental impact on your application’s performance. However, you need to benchmark this operation, because the performance will vary from one implementation to the next.
And
9.120 How do I find the coordinates of a vertex transformed only by the ModelView matrix?
It's often useful to obtain the eye coordinate space value of a vertex (i.e., the object space vertex transformed by the ModelView matrix). You can obtain this by retrieving the current ModelView matrix and performing simple vector / matrix multiplication.
But I'm not sure how to apply these in my situation.
You need to transform/translate "center of view" point into origin, rotate, then invert that translation, back to the object's transform. This is known as a basis change in linear algebra.
This is way easier to work with if you have a proper 3d-math library (I'm assuming you do have one), and that also helps to to stay far from the deprecated fixed-pipeline APIs. (more on that later).
Here's how I'd do it:
Find the transform for the center of view point in world coordinates (figure it out, then draw it to make sure it's correct, with x,y,z axis too, since the axii are supposed to be correct w.r.t. the view). If you use the center-of-view point and the rotation (usually the inverse of the camera's rotation), this will be a transform from world origin to the view center. Store this in a 4x4 matrix transform.
Apply the inverse of the above transform, so that it becomes the origin. glMultMatrixfv(center_of_view_tf.inverse());
Rotate about this point however you want (glRotate())
Transform everything back to world space (glMultMatrixfv(center_of_view_tf);)
Apply object's own world transform (glTranslate/glRotate or glMultMatrix) and draw it.
About the fixed function pipeline
Back in the old days, there were separate transistors for transforming a vertex (or it's texture coordinates), computing where light was in relation to it applying lights (up to 8) and texturing fragments in many different ways. Simply, glEnable(), enabled fixed blocks of silicon to do some computation in the hardware graphics pipeline. As performance grew, die sized shrunk and people demanded more features, the amount of dedicated silicon grew too, and much of it wasn't used.
Eventually, it got so advanced that you could program it in rather obscene ways (register combiners anyone). And then, it became feasible to actually upload a small assembler program for all vertex-level transforms. Then, it made to sense to keep a lot of silicon there that just did one thing (especially as you could've used those transistors to make the programmable stuff faster), so everything became programmable. If "fixed function" rendering was called for, the driver just converted the state (X lights, texture projections, etc) to shader code and uploaded that as a vertex shader.
So, currently, where even the fragment processing is programmable, there is just a lot of fixed-function options that is used by tons and tons of OpenGL applications, but the silicon on the GPU just runs shaders (and lots of it, in parallell).
...
To make OpenGL more efficient, and the drivers less bulky, and the hardware simpler and useable on mobile/console devices and to take full advantage of the programmable hardware that OpenGL runs on these days, many functions in the API are now marked deprecated. They are not available on OpenGL ES 2.0 and beyond (mobile) and you won't be getting the best performance out of them even on desktop systems (where they will still be in the driver for ages to come, serving equally ancient code bases originating back to the dawn of accelerated 3d graphics)
The fixed-functionness mostly concerns how transforms/lighting/texturing etc. are done by "default" in OpenGL (i.e. glEnable(GL_LIGHTING)), instead of you specifying these ops in your custom shaders.
In the new, programmable, OpenGL, transform matrices are just uniforms in the shader. Any rotate/translate/mult/inverse (like the above) should be done by client code (your code) before being uploaded to OpenGL. (Using only glLoadMatrix is one way to start thinking about it, but instead of using gl_ModelViewProjectionMatrix and the ilk in your shader, use your own uniforms.)
It's a bit of a bother, since you have to implement quite a bit of what was done by the GL driver before, but if you have your own object list/graph with transforms and a transform somewhere etc, it's not that much work. (OTOH, if you have a lot of glTranslate/glRotate in your code, it might be...). As I said, a good 3d-math library is indispensable here.
-..
So, to change the above code to "programmable pipeline" style, you'd just do all these matrix multiplications in your own code (instead of the GL driver doing it, still on the CPU) and then send the resulting matrix to opengl as a uniform before you activate the shaders and draw your object from VBOs.
(Note that modern cards do not have fixed-function code, just a lot of code in the driver to compile fixed-function rendering state to a shader that does the job. No wonder "classic" GL drivers are huge...)
...
Some info about this process is available at Tom's Hardware Guide and probably Google too.