I've got a row dimensional array of values that I want to visualize in 3D and I'm using scene kit under OS X for it. I've done it in a clumsy manner by using each column as a point on the X axis, each row as a point on the Z axis, and each value as a normalized point on the Y axis -- I place a sphere at the vector defined by each data point. It works but it doesn't look too good.
I've also done this by building a mesh of lines based on #Matthew's function in Drawing a line between two points using SceneKit (the answer he posted, not the original question). For each point I use his function to draw two lines - one between my current point and the next point to the right and another between my current point and the next point towards the front (except when there is no additional column/row, of course).
Using the second method, my results look much better... however the performance is quite hideous! It takes quite a long time to complete the initial rendering, and if I use a trackpad/mouse to rotate or translate the scene, I might as well get a cup of coffee to wait until my system is usable again (and this is not much hyperbole). Using the sphere method, things render and update very quickly.
Any advice on how to improve the performance when using the lines method? (Note that I am not trying to add both lines and spheres at the same time.) Code-wise, the only difference between approach is which of the following methods gets called (and that for each point, addPixelAt... is called once, but addLineAt... is called twice for most points).
- (SCNNode *)addPixelAtRow:(CGFloat)row Column:(CGFloat)column size:(CGFloat)size color:(NSColor *)color
{
CGFloat radius = 0.5;
SCNSphere *ball = [SCNSphere sphereWithRadius:radius*1.5];
SCNMaterial *material = [SCNMaterial material];
[[material diffuse] setContents:color];
[[material specular] setContents:color];
[ball setMaterials:#[material]];
SCNNode *ballNode = [SCNNode nodeWithGeometry:ball];
[ballNode setPosition:SCNVector3Make(column, size, row)];
[_baseNode addChildNode:ballNode];
return ballNode;
}
- (SCNNode *)addLineFromRow:(CGFloat)row1 Column:(CGFloat)column1 size:(CGFloat)size1
toRow2:(CGFloat)row2 Column2:(CGFloat)column2 size2:(CGFloat)size2 color:(NSColor *)color
{
SCNVector3 positions[] = {
SCNVector3Make(column1, size1, row1),
SCNVector3Make(column2, size2, row2)
};
int indices[] = {0, 1};
SCNGeometrySource *vertexSource = [SCNGeometrySource geometrySourceWithVertices:positions count:2];
NSData *indexData = [NSData dataWithBytes:indices length:sizeof(indices)];
SCNGeometryElement *element = [SCNGeometryElement geometryElementWithData:indexData
primitiveType:SCNGeometryPrimitiveTypeLine
primitiveCount:1
bytesPerIndex:sizeof(int)];
SCNGeometry *line = [SCNGeometry geometryWithSources:#[vertexSource] elements:#[element]];
SCNMaterial *material = [SCNMaterial material];
[[material diffuse] setContents:color];
[[material specular] setContents:color];
[line setMaterials:#[material]];
SCNNode *lineNode = [SCNNode nodeWithGeometry:line];
[_baseNode addChildNode:lineNode];
return lineNode;
}
From the data that you've shown in your question I would say that your main problem is the number of draw calls. Your's is in the tens of thousands, which is way too much. It should probably be a lot closer to ~100.
The reason why you have so many draw calls is that you have so many distinct objects in your scene (each line). The better (but more advanced solution) would probably be to generate a single element for the entire mesh that consists of all the lines. If you want to achieve the same rendering with that mesh (with a color from cold to warm based on the height) then you could do that in a shader modifier.
However, in your case I would start by flattening all the lines (since that would be the smallest code change and should still have a significant performance improvement in your case).
(Optimizing performance is always an iterative process. Once you fix one thing there will be another thing which is the most expensive operation. Without your code I can only say what would help with the current performance problem)
Create an empty node (without adding it to your scene) and generate all the lines, adding them to this node. Then create a flattened copy of that node by calling flattenedClone on the node that contains all the lines
SCNNode *nodeWithAllTheLines = [SCNNode node];
// create all the lines and add them to it...
SCNNode *flattenedNode = [nodeWithAllTheLines flattenedClone];
[_baseNode addChildNode:flattenedNode];
When you do this you should see a significant drop in the number of draw calls (the number after the diamond in the statistics) and hopefully a big increase in performance.
Related
In a nutshell, let's say, I need to draw a complex object (arrow) which consists of certain amount of objects, like five (or more) lines, for instance. And what's more important, that object must be transformed with particular (dynamic) coordinates (including scaling, possibly).
My question is whether SkiaSharp has anything which I can use for manipulating of this complex object transformation (some sort of grouping etc.) or do I still need to calculate every single point manually (with matrix, for instance).
This question is related particularly to SkiaSharp as I use it on Xamarin, but maybe some general answers from Skia can also help with it?
I think, the question might be too common (and possibly not for stackoverflow exactly), but I just can't find any specific information in google.
Yes, I know how to use SkiaSharp for drawing primitives.
create an SKPath and add lines and other shapes to it
SKPath path = new SKPath();
path.LineTo(...);
...
...
then draw the SKPath on your canvas
canvas.DrawPath(path,paint);
you can apply a transform to the entire path before drawing
var rot = new SKMatrix();
SKMatrix.RotateDegrees(ref rot, 45.0f);
path.Transform(rot);
If you are drawing something more complex than a path SKPicture is perfect for this. You can set it up so that you construct it once and then reuse it easily and efficiently. In the example below, the SKPicture's origin is in the center of a 100 x 100 rectangle but that is arbitrary.
SKPicture myPicture;
SKPicture MyPicture {
get {
if(myPicture != null) {
return myPicture;
}
using(SKPictureRecorder recorder = new SKPictureRecorder())
using(SKCanvas canvas = recorder.BeginRecording(new SKRect(-50, -50, 50, 50)))
// draw using primitives
...
myPicture = recorder.EndRecording();
}
return myPicture;
}
}
Then you apply your transforms to the canvas, draw the picture and restore the canvas state. offsetX and offsetY correspond to where the origin of the SKPicture will be rendered.
canvas.Save();
canvas.Translate(offsetX, offsetY);
canvas.Scale(scaleAmount);
canvas.RotateDegrees(degrees);
canvas.DrawPicture(MyPicture);
canvas.Restore();
I want to use Visual C++ to animate fill paths to screen. I have done it with C# before, but now switch to C++ for better perfomance and want do more complex works in the future.
Here is the concept in C#:
In a Canvas I have a number of Path. These paths are closed geometries combine of LineTo and QuadraticBezierTo functions.
Firstly, I fill Silver color for all path.
Then for each path, I fill Green color from one end to other end (up/down/left/right direction) (imagine a progress bar increase its value from min to max). I do it by set the Fill brush of the path to a LinearGradientBrush with two color Green and Silver with same offset, then increase the offset from 0 to 1 by Timer.
When a path is fully green, continue with next path.
When all path is fill with Green, come back first step.
I want to do same thing in Visual C++. I need to know an effective way to:
Create and store paths in a collection to reuse. Because the path is quite lot of point, recreate them repeatly take lots of CPU usage.
Draw all paths to a window.
Do animation fill like step 2, 3, 4 in above concept.
So, what I need is:
A suitable way to create and store closed paths. Note: paths are combine of points connect by functions same with C# LineTo and QuadraticBezierTo function.
Draw and animated fill the paths to screen.
Can you please suggest one way to do above step? (outline what I have to read, then I can study about it myself). I know basic of Visual C++, Win32 GUI and a little about draw context (HDC) and GDI, but only start to learn Graphic/Drawing.
Sorry about my English! If anythings I explain dont clear, please let me know.
how many is quite lot of point ? what is the target framerate? for low enough counts you can use GDI for this otherwise you need HW acceleration like OpenGL,DirectX.
I assume 2D so You need:
store your path as list of segments
for example like this:
struct path_segment
{
int p0[2],p1[2],p2[2]; // points
int type; // line/bezier
float length; // length in pixels or whatever
};
const int MAX=1024; // max number of segments
path_segment path[MAX]; // list of segments can use any template like List<path_segment> path; instead
int paths=0; // actual number of segments;
float length=0.0; // while path length in pixels or whatever
write functions to load and render path[]
The render is just for visual check if you load is OK ... for now atlest
rewrite the render so
it take float t=<0,1> as input parameter which will render path below t with one color and the rest with other. something like this:
int i;
float l=0.0,q,l0=t*length; // separation length;
for (i=0;i<paths;i++)
{
q=l+path[i].length;
if (q>=l0)
{
// split/render path[i] to < 0,l-l0> with color1
// split/render path[i] to <l-l0,q-l0> with color2
// if you need split parameter in <0,1> then =(l-l0)/path[i].length;
i++; break;
}
else
{
//render path[i] with color1
}
l=q;
}
for (;i<paths;i++)
{
//render path[i] with color2
}
use backbuffer for speedup
so render whole path with color1 to some bitmap. On each animation step just render the newly added color1 stuff. And on each redraw just copy the bitmap to screen instead of rendering the same geometry over and over. Of coarse if you have zoom/pan/resize capabilities you need to redraw the bitmap fully on each of those changes ...
I've got a question about libGDX collision detection. Because it's a rather specific question I have not found any good solution on the internet yet.
So, I already created "humans" that consist of different body parts, each with rectangle-shaped collision detection.
Now I want to implement weapons and skills, which for example look like this:
Skill example image
Problem
Working with rectangles in collision detections would be really frustrating for players when there are skills like this: They would dodge a skill successfully but the collision detector would still damage them.
Approach 1:
Before I started working with Libgdx I have created an Android game with a custom engine and similar skills. There I solved the problem following way:
Detect rectangle collision
Calculate overlapping rectangle section
Check every single pixel of the overlapping part of the skill for transparency
If there is any non-transparent pixel found -> Collision
That's a kind of heavy way, but as only overlapping pixels are checked and the rest of the game is really light, it works completely fine.
At the moment my skill images are loaded as "TextureRegion", where it is not possible to access single pixels.
I have found out that libGDX has a Pixmap class, which would allow such pixel checks. Problem is: having them loaded as Pixmaps additionally would 1. be even more heavy and 2. defeat the whole purpose of the Texture system.
An alternative could be to load all skills as Pixmap only. What do you think: Would this be a good way? Is it possible to draw many Pixmaps on the screen without any issues and lag?
Approach 2:
An other way would be to create Polygons with the shape of the skills and use them for the collision detection.
a)
But how would I define a Polygon shape for every single skill (there are over 150 of them)? Well after browsing a while, I found this useful tool: http://www.aurelienribon.com/blog/projects/physics-body-editor/
it allows to create Polygon shapes by hand and then save them as JSON files, readable by the libGDX application. Now here come the difficulties:
The Physics Body Editor is connected to Box2d (which I am not using). I would either have to add the whole Box2d physics engine (which I do not need at all) just because of one tiny collision detection OR I would have to write a custom BodyEditorLoader which would be a tough, complicated and time-intensive task
Some images of the same skill sprite have a big difference in their shapes (like the second skill sprite example). When working with the BodyEditor tool, I would have to not only define the shape of every single skill, but I would have to define the shape of several images (up to 12) of every single skill. That would be extremely time-intensive and a huge mess when implementing these dozens of polygon shapes
b)
If there is any smooth way to automatically generate Polygons out of images, that could be the solution. I could simply connect every sprite section to a generated polygon and check for collisions that way. There are a few problems though:
Is there any smooth tool which can generate Polygon shapes out of an image (and does not need too much time therefor)?
I don't think that a tool like this (if one exists) can directly work with Textures. It would probably need Pixmaps. It would not be needed to keep te Pixmaps loaded after the Polygon creation though. Still an extremely heavy task!
My current thoughts
I'm stuck at this point because there are several possible approaches but all of them have their difficulties. Before I choose one path and continue coding, it would be great if you could leave some of your ideas and knowledge.
There might be helpful classes and code included in libGDX that solve my problems within seconds - as I am really new at libGDX I just don't know a lot about it yet.
Currently I think I would go with approach 1: Work with pixel detection. That way I made exact collision detections possible in my previous Android game.
What do you think?
Greetings
Felix
I, personally, would feel like pixel-to-pixel collision would be overkill on performance and provide some instances where I would still feel cheated - (I got hit by the handle of the axe?)
If it were me, I would add a "Hitbox" to each skill. StreetFighter is a popular game which uses this technique. (newer versions are in 3D, but hitbox collision is still 2D) Hitboxes can change frame-by-frame along with the animation.
Empty spot here to add example images - google "Streetfighter hitbox" in the meantime
For your axe, there could be a defined rectangle hitbox along the edge of one or both ends - or even over the entire metal head of the axe.
This keeps it fairly simple, without having to mess with exact polygons, but also isn't overly performance heavy like having every single pixel being its own hitbox.
I've used that exact body editor you referenced and it has the ability to generate polygons and/or circles for you. I also made a loader for the generated JSON with the Jackson library. This may not be the answer for you since you'd have to implement box2d. But here's how how I did it anyway.
/**
* Adds all the fixtures defined in jsonPath with the name'lookupName', and
* attach them to the 'body' with the properties defined in 'fixtureDef'.
* Then converts to the proper scale with 'width'.
*
* #param body the body to attach fixtures to
* #param fixtureDef the fixture's properties
* #param jsonPath the path to the collision shapes definition file
* #param lookupName the name to find in jsonPath json file
* #param width the width of the sprite, used to scale fixtures and find origin.
* #param height the height of the sprite, used to find origin.
*/
public void addFixtures(Body body, FixtureDef fixtureDef, String jsonPath, String lookupName, float width, float height) {
JsonNode collisionShapes = null;
try {
collisionShapes = json.readTree(Gdx.files.internal(jsonPath).readString());
} catch (JsonProcessingException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
for (JsonNode node : collisionShapes.findPath("rigidBodies")) {
if (node.path("name").asText().equals(lookupName)) {
Array<PolygonShape> polyShapes = new Array<PolygonShape>();
Array<CircleShape> circleShapes = new Array<CircleShape>();
for (JsonNode polygon : node.findPath("polygons")) {
Array<Vector2> vertices = new Array<Vector2>(Vector2.class);
for (JsonNode vector : polygon) {
vertices.add(new Vector2(
(float)vector.path("x").asDouble() * width,
(float)vector.path("y").asDouble() * width)
.sub(width/2, height/2));
}
polyShapes.add(new PolygonShape());
polyShapes.peek().set(vertices.toArray());
}
for (final JsonNode circle : node.findPath("circles")) {
circleShapes.add(new CircleShape());
circleShapes.peek().setPosition(new Vector2(
(float)circle.path("cx").asDouble() * width,
(float)circle.path("cy").asDouble() * width)
.sub(width/2, height/2));
circleShapes.peek().setRadius((float)circle.path("r").asDouble() * width);
}
for (PolygonShape shape : polyShapes) {
Vector2 vectors[] = new Vector2[shape.getVertexCount()];
for (int i = 0; i < shape.getVertexCount(); i++) {
vectors[i] = new Vector2();
shape.getVertex(i, vectors[i]);
}
shape.set(vectors);
fixtureDef.shape = shape;
body.createFixture(fixtureDef);
}
for (CircleShape shape : circleShapes) {
fixtureDef.shape = shape;
body.createFixture(fixtureDef);
}
}
}
}
And I would call it like this:
physics.addFixtures(body, fixtureDef, "ship/collision_shapes.json", shipType, width, height);
Then for collision detection:
public ContactListener shipsExplode() {
ContactListener listener = new ContactListener() {
#Override
public void beginContact(Contact contact) {
Body bodyA = contact.getFixtureA().getBody();
Body bodyB = contact.getFixtureB().getBody();
for (Ship ship : ships) {
if (ship.body == bodyA) {
ship.setExplode();
}
if (ship.body == bodyB) {
ship.setExplode();
}
}
}
};
return listener;
}
then you would add the listener to the world:
world.setContactListener(physics.shipsExplode());
my sprites' width and height were small since you're dealing in meters not pixels once you start using box2d. One sprite height was 0.8f and width was 1.2f for example. If you made the sprites width and height in pixels the physics engine hits speed limits that are built in http://www.iforce2d.net/b2dtut/gotchas
Don't know if this still matter to you guys, but I built a small python script that returns the pixels positions of the points in the edges of the image. There is room to improve the script, but for me, for now its ok...
from PIL import Image, ImageFilter
filename = "dship1"
image = Image.open(filename + ".png")
image = image.filter(ImageFilter.FIND_EDGES)
image.save(filename + "_edge.png")
cols = image.width
rows = image.height
points = []
w = 1
h = 1
i = 0
for pixel in list(image.getdata()):
if pixel[3] > 0:
points.append((w, h))
if i == cols:
w = 0
i = 0
h += 1
w += 1
i += 1
with open(filename + "_points.txt", "wb") as nf:
nf.write(',\n'.join('%s, %s' % x for x in points))
In case of updates you can find them here: export positions
I've just started learning THREE and have been messing about with the three.js example of controllable MD2 characters to try and fashion it into a 3rd person shooter kind of game. I've been trying to write a simple algorithm for the enemy characters and I'm pretty sure that ray-casting would be ideal.The whole idea is that the enemies should stop rotating once they're facing the player. But Here's the problem that's giving me sleepless nights! :
Let's say, the enemy object is the origin for the ray caster ray. No matter what direction I set for the direction of that ray ( even, for example (1,0,0) - the positive x-axis), the ray's direction is always pointing towards the center of the scene!!!
Please help! haven't been able to find any Example online for this kind of use for the ray caster (apart from collision detection which I really don't need at the moment).
If all you want is for enemies to stop rotating when they are looking at the player, I would consider just checking the direction between them, as it's a lot faster than casting a ray to see if it intersects:
// Assuming `enemy` is a THREE.Mesh
var targetDir = enemy.position.clone().sub(player.position).normalize();
var currentDir = (new THREE.Vector3()).applyMatrix4(enemy.matrixWorld).sub(enemy.position).normalize();
var amountToRotate = currentDir.sub(targetDir);
var offset = amountToRotate.length();
Then rotate each axis no more than the value for that axis in amountToRotate if offset is greater than some threshold.
That said, here is how you use a Raycaster, given the variables above:
var raycaster = new THREE.Raycaster(enemy.position, targetDir);
var intersections = raycaster.intersectObject(player);
Note that if you are running any of the above code in an animation loop, it will create a lot of garbage collection churn because you are constantly creating a bunch of new objects and then immediately throwing them away. A better pattern, which is used a lot in the library itself, is to initialize objects once, copy values to them if you need to, and then use those copies for computation. For example, you could create a function to do your raycasting for you like this:
var isEnemyLookingAtPlayer = (function() {
var raycaster = new THREE.Raycaster();
var pos = new THREE.Vector3();
return function(enemy) {
raycaster.ray.origin.copy(enemy.position);
raycaster.ray.direction.copy(pos.copy(enemy.position).sub(player.position).normalize());
return !!raycaster.intersectObject(player).length;
};
})();
G'day all,
In short, I'm using a for loop to create a bunch of identical sprites that I want to bounce around the screen. The problem is how do I write a collision detection process for the sprites. I have used the process of placing rectangles around sprites and using the .intersects method for rectangles but in that case I created each sprite separately and could identify each one uniquely. Now I have a bunch of sprites but no apparent way to pick one from another.
In detail, if I create an object called Bouncer.cs and give it the movement instructions in it's update() method then create a bunch of sprites using this in Game.cs:
for (int i = 1; i < 5; ++i)
{
Vector2 position = new Vector2(i * 50, i * 50);
Vector2 direction = new Vector2(i * 10, i * 10);
Vector2 velocity = new Vector2(10);
Components.Add(new Bouncer(this, position, direction, velocity, i));
}
base.Initialize();
I can draw a rectangle around each one using:
foreach (Bouncer component1 in Components)
{
Bouncer thing = (Bouncer)component1;
Rectangle thingRectangle;
thingRectangle = new Rectangle((int)thing.position.X, (int)thing.position.Y, thing.sprite.Width, thing.sprite.Height);
But now, how do I check for a collision? I can hardly use:
if (thingRectangle.Intersects(thingRectangle))
I should point out I'm a teacher by trade and play with coding to keep my brain from turning to mush. Recently I have been working with Python and with Python I could just put all the sprites into a list:
sprites[];
Then I could simply refer to each as sprite[1] or sprite[2] or whatever its index in the list is. Does XNA have something like this?
Please let me know if any more code needs to be posted.
Thanks,
Andrew.
One solution, which I use in my game engine, is to have a Logic code run inside the objects for every game Update, ie. every frame. It seems you already do this, according to the variable names, which indicate you run some physics code in the objects to update their positions.
You might also want to create the collision rectangle inside the Bouncer's constructor so it's more accessible and you make good use of object oriented programming, maybe even make it an accessor, so you can make it update every time you call it instead of manually updating the bounding/collision box. For example:
public Rectangle #BoundingBox {
get { return new Rectangle(_Position.X, _Position.Y, width, height); }
}
Whichever way works, but the collision checks can be run inside the Bouncer object. You can either make the reference list of the Bouncer objects static or pass it to the objects itself. The code for collisions is very simply:
foreach(Bouncer bouncer in Components) //Components can be a static List or you can pass it on in the constructor of the Bouncer object
{
if (bouncer.BoundingBox.Intersects(this.BoundingBox))
{
//they collided
}
}