Normally the 0,0 coordinate refers to the top left corner of a view. Higher x coordinates are further right. A frame / rectangle in the view has its leftmost point being its x coordinate and its rightmost point being its x coordinate plus its width.
Is it possible to reverse that, or better yet, reverse just the x axis? Make the 0,0 be the top right. Make the higher origins be further to the left. AND make it so a frame / rectangle in the view has its rightmost point as its x coordinate and its leftmost point as its x coordinate plus its width.
I know I could transform this stuff myself with pure math, but I was wondering if iOS offers this capability.
Not really.
iOS 9 has some new flipping stuff for supporting right-to-left languages, but I don't think you can force it.
You can flip the drawing of a view by setting its transform property to CGAffineTransformMakeScale(-1, 1), but that won't change the underlying coordinate system.
SpriteKit has a different coordinate system than normal UIViews, but its coordinate system isn't what you want.
You may want to read Coordinate Systems and Transforms, which discusses some techniques for mapping points between different coordinate systems. This MSDN article covers mapping points using matrices, which can help you on a theoretical level.
It's not documented, but UIView has an instance variable, _flipsHorizontalAxis, that does exactly what it sounds like it would do. It looks like it just passes through the CALayer variable of the same name.
Related
I'm animating objects falling onto a board from above, and I want to animate the board 'falling back' as the objects fall upon it. Objects can fall at any point on the board, and when the board 'falls back' I am scaling the board to a smaller scale.
When using CGAffineTransformScale objects scale based on their anchor point, the centre of the object; I want to scale the board and then line up the transformed board with the object that has fallen on it, so that the object that has fallen appears to stay in the same place relative to the board (or, more correctly, the board stays in the same place relative to the position of the board).
I spent hours, and hours changing the anchor point to the position that the object fell, but this revealed a fundamental misunderstanding on my part of how layer.anchorPoint actually works.
I imagine the solution is deriving a vector from the centre of the board to the given falling object and then somehow adjusting position of the board in the transformation so it's the same place. This is where I need help!
As you'd expect in these situations, an animated gif is required.
CALayer's anchorPoint property is the correct property to use for this, with the one minor annoyance that it works in the unit coordinate space, that is, it goes from 0 to 1, not in pixels:
You specify the value for this property using the unit coordinate space. The default value of this property is (0.5, 0.5), which represents the center of the layer’s bounds rectangle. All geometric manipulations to the view occur about the specified point. For example, applying a rotation transform to a layer with the default anchor point causes the layer to rotate around its center. Changing the anchor point to a different location would cause the layer to rotate around that new point.
Because of this, setting an anchor point in pixels would obviously result in some very strange behaviour. You would need to calculate your new anchor point in the unit coordinate space for it to work properly, so, instead of doing something like this:
board.layer.anchorPoint = CGPointMake(ball.x, ball.y);
you would do this:
board.layer.anchorPoint = CGPointMake(ball.x / board.layer.bounds.size.width,
ball.y / board.layer.bounds.size.height);
UPDATE: When you change the anchorPoint property, the view will move, because the anchorPoint, which is set relative to the layer in the unit coordinate space, is anchored to the layer's position property, which is set in the superview's coordinate space. In this way, when you change the value of the anchorPoint property, the view will move such that the point at the new anchor point is at the same place as the old one. You will need to compensate for this, as described in this answer.
Is it possible to change the origin of an NSImage? If so how would I go about doing this. I have coordinates in regular cartesian system some of them with negative values and I am trying to draw them at the corresponding point in the NSImage but since the origin is at (0,0) there are some missing.
EDIT:Say I have an drawing aspect that needs to be done to an image at the point (-10,-10), currently this doesn't show up. Is there a way to fix that?
If it's like in iOS (you may have to adapt a little the code) and if my memory is still good, you have to do this, since origin is readOnly:
CGRect myFrame = yourImage.frame;
myFrame.origin.x=newX; myFrame.origin.y=newY;
yourImage.frame = myFrame;
I think you are confusing an NSImage with it's container. An NSImage has no bounds or frame, and thus no origin. It does have a size which may represent the pixel dimensions of its birtmap representation ( if it has one) or otherwise could represent it's bounding box ( if it is a vector image). Drawing in an image at a pixel location of (-10,-10) doesn't really make sense.
An NSImage is displayed in a container ( typically an NSImageView), and the container's bounds.origin will dictate the placement of the image relative to the imageView, but you can't modify pixels beyond the edge of the bitmap plane.
In any case you probably want to be using a subclassed NSView in which you would override the drawRect method for your custom drawing. NSView does have a bounds.origin but this is not relevant to your in-drawing coordinates, but rather to the position of the drawn content as a whole to the view's bounding box. The coordinate system that you will be drawing into will be referenced to your graphics context which will (usually) pin the origin (0,0) to the bottom left corner (OSX) or top left corner (iOS). If you are trying to represent negative points on a Cartesian plane, you will need to apply a translation transform to map your points into this positive coordinate space.
I'm trying to explain in a few words, badly, something which Apple explains in great detail in their Quartz 2D Programming Guide.
I am trying to develop an iOS app to make any given image (UIImage) warp on selected locations.
So for this task to be accomplished what should be the rightmost way going forward, for now i'm doing some research on doing this on OpenGL (frankly any heads up on the framework would be nice too).
So finally the requirement is to get the UIImage warp on some given locations. (If x, y coordinates are there)
If you're sufficiently familiar with (or willing to learn) OpenGL, then you could do this:
Create a flat, rectangular grid of points to be a mesh that will be displayed with OpenGL.
Apply the image to the mesh as a texture.
When distorting the image at a particular location, you can just decide which points on the mesh will be affected by the distortion, and move them.
You can push points out from the center, or in toward a center, or shift them all in the same direction. If the distortion affects a large area, then you change a lot of points (possibly changing those in the center by more than those near the edges of the affected area).
Not sure what you mean by 'warp'. Do you mean skew it in 3 dimensions? If so you can adjust the CGAffineTransform for the UIImageView you are displaying it in to get that effect.
If you mean some kind of image processing warp, and you are using iOS 5, you can use Core Image for that.
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 4º 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.
I do not really understand the way I'm suppose to render a side-scroller? How do I know what to render when my character move? What kind of positionning should I use for the characters?
I hope my question is clear
The easiest way i've found to do it is have a characterX and characterY variable [integer or float, whatever you want] Then have a cameraX and cameraY variable. Every object in the scene is drawn at theObjectX-cameraX, theObjectY-cameraY...
CameraX/CameraY are tweened by a similar-to-midpoint formula so eventually they'll reach playerx/playery[Cx = (Cx*99+Px)/100] ... yeah
By doing this, every object moves in the stage's space, and is transformed only on render [saving you from headaches]
Use a matrix to define a camera reference frame.
Use space partitioning to split up your level into screens/windows.
Think of your player sprite as any other entity, like enemies and interactive objects.
Now what you want is the abstraction of a camera. You can define a camera as a 3x3 matrix with this layout:
[rotX_X, rotY_X, 0]
[rotX_Y, rotY_Y, 0]
[transX, transY, 1]
The 2x2 sub-matrix in the top-left corner is a rotation matrix. transX and transY defines the translation part, i.e the origin. You also get scaling for free. Just simply scale the rotation part with a scalar, and you have yourself a zoom.
For this to work properly with rotation, your sprites need to be polygons/primitives, say like triangles or quads; you can't just apply the matrix to the positions of the sprites when drawing. If you don't need rotation, just transforming the center point will work fine.
If you want the camera to follow the player, use the player's position as the camera origin. That is the translation vector [transX, transY]
So how do you apply the matrix to entity positions and model vertices? You do a vector-matrix multiplication.
v' = vM^-1, where v' is the new vector, v is the old vector, and M^-1 is the matrix inverse. A camera needs to be an inverse transform because it defines a local coordinate system. An analogy could be: If you are in front of me and I turn left from my reference frame, I am turning your right. This applies to all affine and linear transformations, like scaling, rotation and translation.
Split up your level into sub-parts so you can cull objects and scenery which does not need to be rendered. Your viewport is of a certain size/resolution. Only render scenery and entities which intersect with your viewport. Instead of checking each and every entity against the viewport bounds, assign each entity to a certain sub-screen and test the bounds of the sub-screen against the viewport and camera bounds. If your divide your levels into parts which are the same size as your viewport, then the maximum number of screens visible
at any particular time is:
2 if your camera only scrolls left and right.
4 if your camera scrolls left, right, up and down.
4 if your camera scrolls in any direction, and additionally can be rotated.
A screen-change is an event you can use to activate entities belonging to that screen. That could be enemies, background animations, doors or whatever you like.
If this is your first foray into writing a side-scroller, I'd suggest considering using an already existing game engine (like Construct or Gamemaker or XNA or whatever fits your experience level) so you don't have to worry about what order to render things and how to make it all work. Mess with that a bit--probably exploring a few of them--to get a feel for how they do things then venture out to your own once you've gotten used to it.
Not that there's anything wrong with baptism by fire but it can get pretty overwhelming in my opinion.