Custom geometry's mesh material gets distorted after applying matrix transformation to my custom geometry.
In the sample jsfiddle, I've included my custom TorusGeometry. My custom geometry is placed next to a built-in CylinderGeometry.
You can see the difference in material between these two meshes. If I remove the geometry transformation, both the mesh's materials look fine.
I guess, I'm messing the normals while doing matrix transformation, but not sure to fix it.
https://jsfiddle.net/arundhaj/nrdg2faL/
Related
I am creating a scene with several thousand cubes, each of which can be translated, scaled and rotated.
Initially, I tried creating a cube geometry, applying the transformations, creating a mesh with my material and adding it to the scene. That worked but was very slow because of all the draw calls.
So now, for all the cubes, I create a THREE.BoxGeometry(1,1,1), and merge it with a single THREE.Geometry() each time before finally creating a material and a single mesh and adding it to my scene.
The performance is drastically improved but I don't know how to apply a translation (XYZ), scale (XYZ) and rotation (quaternion) to each box before merging it. Can someone point me at the right syntax?
Secondly, if I merge my geometry like this, is there still a way to pick out a single box with a raycaster? Typically I've used the object name on the mesh but that's not relevant anymore.
Thank you.
My question is related to this article:
http://blog.wolfire.com/2009/06/how-to-project-decals/
If my understanding is correct, a mesh made from the intersection of the original mesh and a cube is added to the scene to make a decal appear.
I need to save the final texture. So I was wondering if there is a way to 'merge' the texture of the original mesh and the added decal mesh?
You'd need to do some tricky stuff to convert from the model geometry space into UV coordinate space so you could draw the new pixels into the texture map. If you want to be able to use more than one material that way, you'd also probably need to implement some kind of "material map" similar to how some deferred rendering systems work. Otherwise you're limited to at most, one material per face, which wouldn't work for detailed decals with alpha.
I guess you could copy the UV coordinates from the original mesh into the decal mesh, and the use that information to reproject the decal texture into the original texture
I needed to refactor my custom mesh creation a bit
from:
create mesh of unified sizes (SIZE,SIZE,SIZE), than scale them as needed (setting scale for each axis)
to:
create mesh with correct size, do not scale later
meshes are custom generated (vertices, faces, normals, uvs), nothing of this process was altered, worked like a charm before
=> resulting meshes are the same size, position, etc.
The whole scene setup stays the same: lights, shadowing, materials, yet when using the second approach the whole lighting is very very bright and super reflective, is that a known issue?
material used is MeshPhongMaterial with map, bumMap, specMap, envMap
using three.js r68, no error/warning in console
before:
https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3647854/3876053/76b8f260-2158-11e4-9e96-c8de55eaec9a.png
after:
https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3647854/3876052/76b7fa86-2158-11e4-9393-8f3eece04c0b.png
Did you rescale the normals in the mesh?
The mesh format probably needs normalized normals, in which case, the new normals are now incorrect, but would've been correct, if you hadn't rescaled.
Alternately, you say the lights haven't been changed, maybe they need to be appropriately redirected in the scene. (Assuming you're applying different scaling factors in each axis.)
I need to do vertex displacements using a texture map in Three.js.
Is there an existing material that supports that?
If not, what is the best way to duplicate an existing Three.js shader so that I can add in some vertex displacement calculations? I would like to keep existing functionalities such as shadows and wireframe on the material.
Vertex displacements using a texture map are supported by THREE.ShaderTerrain[ "terrain" ] and THREE.ShaderLib[ "normalmap" ].
Examples of their use can be found in http://threejs.org/examples/webgl_terrain_dynamic.html and http://threejs.org/examples/webgl_materials_normalmap.html.
If these do not suit your needs, then you will have to write your own shader. Doing so is not easy. It is best to modify an existing shader.
three.js r.61
Is it possible to apply texture to mesh without specifying UV's in geometry in three.js ?
There are classes such as THREE.CubeGeometry, THREE.SphereGeometry, etc. that automatically generate the UV coordinates for you. However, if you are creating your own geometry from scratch (i.e., specifying vertex locations, creating faces, etc.) then the answer is no. Either you need to set the UV coordinates manually when creating the geometry, or you need to write a custom shader which determines the UV coordinates for any given point. Think about it this way: if you don't specify UV coordinates, the points on your geometry have no idea which point on your texture they should display.