I have 10x10 sqares that are forming a map. The variable zoom, xPos and yPos are defining how deep I am scolling in the map and the position of the camera.
Each tile has a x and y - coordinate (0-9).
How can I display this map?
I've tried to do this:
rect(xzoom+xPos, yzoom+xPos, zoom, zoom); //the function rect makes a rectangle with the center at the first 2 inputs)
The problem is that I'm always zooming in the upper left corner;
I've also tried this:
rect((x-5.5)*zoom+xPos, (y-5.5)*zoom+yPos);
but this zooms always in the center in the map while I want it to zoom in the center of the screen.
Please help me
I really suggest sitting down with some graph paper and a pencil. Draw out a bunch of example grids with their coordinates and sizes. Then draw out what they look like at different zoom level until you notice a pattern. If you can't get that pattern to work, please post an MCVE and we'll go from there.
Also note that Processing has a scale() function that might come in handy. More info is available in the reference.
Related
I'm using JChart2D for visualization. I would like to make the X and Y axis equal in terms of pixels. By doing so its much easier to see how far the points are from each other in euclidean distance (see image). As it is now, the x-axis is more stretched out. They already have the same range in terms of values.
The framesize defines the pixel values right now, i.e:
jFrame.setSize(800,600);. Everything then dynamically fits inside the frame where the Chart2D resize itself to make space. I find the pixels manually, but that seems stupid. Also, if i have a scenario with a lot of clusters, the legends line will wrap and thus resize the chart.
I've googled a lot and looked at the documentation, but I've been unable to find a solution.
So how do i set the chart to a fixed size, that's independent from the other items in the frame?
Image example:
What do you expect if you would make it and still insist on the JFrame to be non-rectanguar to be displayed in the remaining 200 px in x range? The void grey?
You could achieve this e.g. by setting a GridBagLayout to the JFrame.getContentPane() and define a grid of two vertical cells - one grid to take 600px x 600px and the second to take 200px x 600px. But then you have the void in the 2nd pane. HTH, Achim
By doing so its much easier to see how far the points are from each
other in euclidean distance
not really, the Euclidean Distance requires at the end the position of the 2 points you are calculating and you have it... otherwise you wouldnt be able to plot anything in the canvas..
another aproach that you can use is implement a ViewPort over the canvas but that makes sense only for zoom in/out images and tht is not your case...
I am using a GoPro HERO 4 on a drone to capture images that need to be georeferenced. Ideally I need coordinates of the captured image's corners relative to the drone.
I have the camera's:
Altitude
Horizontal and vertical field of view
Rotation in all 3 axes
I have found a couple of solutions but I can't quite translate them for my purposes. The closest one I found is here https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/56596/how-do-i-calculate-the-ground-footprint-of-an-aerial-camera but I can't figure out how and if it's possible for me to use it. Particularly when I have to take both pitch and roll into account.
Thanks for any help I get.
Edit: I code my software in Java.
If you have rotations in all three axes then you can use these matrices - http://planning.cs.uiuc.edu/node102.html - to construct a full (3x3) rotation matrix for your camera.
Assuming that, when the rotation matrix is an identity (i.e. in the camera's frame) you have defined the camera's axes to be:
X axis for front
Y for side (left)
Z for up
In the camera frame, the rays have directions:
Calculate these directions and rotate them using the matrix to get the real-world axes. Use the camera's real world coordinate as the source.
To calculate the points on the ground: https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall00/cs426/lectures/raycast/sld017.htm
im trying do develop a Zelda like game. So far i am using bitmaps and everything runs smooth. At this point the camera of the hero is fixed, meaning, that he can be anywhere on the screen.
The problem with that is scaling. Supporting every device and keeping every in perfect sized rects doesnt seem to be that easy :D
To prevent that i need a moving camera. Than i can scale everything to be equally sized on every device. The hero would than be in the middle of the screen for the first step.
The working solution for that is
xCam += hero.moveX;
yCam += hero.moveY;
canvas.translate(xCam,yCam);
drawRoom();
canvas.restore();
drawHero();
I do it like this, because i dont wand to rearrange every tile in the game. I guess that could be too much processing on some devices. As i said, this works just fine. the hero is in the middle of the screen, and the whole room is moving.
But the problem is collision detection.
Here a quick example:
wall.rect.intersects(hero.rect);
Assuming the wall was originally on (0/0) and the hero is on (screenWitdh/2 / screenHeight/2) they should collide on some point.
The problem is, that the x and y of the wall.rect never change. They are (0/0) at any point of the canvas translation, so they can never collide.
I know, that I can work with canvas.getClipBounds() and then use the coordinates of the returned rect to change every tile, but as I mentioned above, I am trying to avoid that plus, the returned rect only works with int values, and not float.
Do you guys know any solution for that problem, or has anyone ever fixed something like this?
Looking forward to your answers!
You can separate your model logic and view logic. Suppose your development dimension for the window is WxH. In this case if your sprite in the model is 100x100 and placed at 0,0, it will cover area from 0,0 to 100, 100. Let's add next sprite (same 100x100 dimension) at 105,0 (basically slightly to the right of the first one), which covers area from 105,0 to 205,100. It is obvious that in the model they are not colliding. Now, as for view if your target device happens to be WxH you just draw the model as it is. If your device has a screen with w = 2*W, h = 2*H, so twice as big in each direction. You just multiply the x and y by w / W and h / H respectively. Therefore we get 2x for x and y, which on screen becomes 1st object - from 0,0 to 200, 200, 2nd object - from 210,0 to 410, 200. As can be seen they are still not colliding. To sum up, separate your game logic from your drawing (rendering) logic.
I think you should have variables holding the player's position on the "map". So you can use this to determine the collision with the non changing wall. It should look something like (depensing on the rest of your code):
canvas.translate(-hero.rect.centerX(), -.rect.centerY());
drawRoom();
canvas.restore();
drawHero();
Generally you should do the calculations in map coordinates, not on screen. For rendering just use the (negative) player position for translation.
I've recently been looking into LibGDX and seem to have hit a wall, seen in the picture, the blue dot represents the users finger, the map generation it self is where i seem to get stuck, does LibGDX provide a method of dynamically drawing curved objects? I could simply generate them myself as images but then the image is hugely stretched to the point of the gap for the finger can fit 3! But also would need to be 1000's of PX tall to accommodate the whole level design.
Is it such that i should be drawing hundreds of polygons close together to make a curved line?
On a side not i'll need a way of determining when the object has from bottom to top so i can generate another 'chunk' of map.
You don't need hundreds of polygons to make a curve like you drew. You could get away with 40 quads on the left, and 40 on the right, and it would look pretty smooth. Raise that to 100 on each side and it will look almost perfectly smooth, and no modern device is going to have any trouble running that at 60fps.
You could use the Mesh class to generate a procedural mesh for each side. You can make the mesh stay in one spot, locked to the camera, and modify it's vertices and UVs to make it look like you are panning down an infinitely long corridor. This will take a fair amount of math up front but should be smooth sailing once you have that down.
Basically, your level design could be based on some kind of equation that takes Y offset as an input. Or it could be a long array of offsets, and you could use a spline equation or linear equation to interpolate between them. The output would be the UV and X coordinates which can be used to update each of the vertices of your two meshes.
You can use the vertex shader to efficiently update the UV coordinates, using a constant offset uniform parameter that you update each frame. That way you don't have to move UV data to the GPU every frame.
For the vertex positions, use your Mesh's underlying float[] and call setVertices() each frame to update it. Info here.
Actually, it might look better if you leave the UV's and the X positions alone, and just scroll the Y positions up. Keep a couple quads of padding off top and bottom of screen, and just move the top quad to the bottom after it scrolls off screen.
How about creating a set of curved forms that can be put together variably. Like the gap in the middle will at the top and bottom of each image be in the middle (with the same curvature at end and beginning points)...
And inbetween the start and end points you can go crazy on the shape.
And finally, you can randomly put those images together and get an endless world.
If you don't want to stop in the middle each time, you could also have like three entry and exit points (left, middle, right)... and after an image that ends left, you of course need to add an image that starts left, but might end somewhere else...
I've been looking around and i couldn't find an answer to this but what I have done is create a cube / box and the camera will squash and stretch depending on where I am looking at. This all seems to resolve it self when the screen is perfectly square but when I'm using 16:9 it stretches and squashes the shapes. Is it possible to change this?
16:9
and this is 500px X 500px
As a side question would it be possible to change the color of background "sky"?
OpenGL uses a cube [-1,1]^3 to represent the frustum in normalized device coordinates. The Viewport transform strechtes this in x and y direction to [0,width] and [0,height]. So to get the correct output aspect ratio, you have to take the viewport dimensions into account when transfroming the vertices into clip space. Usually, this is part of the projection matrix. The old fixed-function gluPerspective() function has a parameter to directly create a frustum for a given aspect ratio. As you do not show any code, it is hard to suggest what you actually should change, but it should be quite easy, as it boils down to a simple scale operation along x and y.
To the side question: That color is defined by the values the color buffer is set to when clearing the it. You can set the color via glClearColor().