I have one outer canvas inside which I am loading another canvas (large size). I have set the clip geometry so only a part of inner (large) canvas is visible on screen.
Since the inner canvas is large in size so I have kept the initial scale of inner canvas as 0.4 i.e. I have applied composite transform on inner canvas and made scaleX and scaleY as 0.4.
Now I have implemented gesture listener methods OnPinchStart and OnPinchDelta. In OnPinchDelta I am zooming the canvas.
The problem is that since the initial scale is 0.4 so until the scale reaches (or scale crosses 1), the canvas is not zooming from center means it's position gets changed. However as soon as scale factor reaches (or crosses) 1, the zooming of canvas starts properly.
In short when the scale factor is less than 1 the zooming is not happening from center or other way, canvas position does not remain proper.
I have tried many different approaches but scale factor less than 1 is not working properly for me. Any help.
var factor = // calculate this based on amount of data and the speed
var width = // element rendered width
var height = // element rendered height
var changeInWidth = (1-factor) * width; // can be 0, neg or pos
var changeInHeight = (1-factor) * height;
var changeInX = changeInWidth / 2;
var changeInY = changeInHeight / 2;
Canvas.SetLeft(element, Canvas.GetLeft(element) + changeInX);
Canvas.SetTop(element, Canvas.GetTop(element) + changeInY);
Just make sure your element is wrapped by a Canvas, otherwise the Left and Top would be ignored.
In order to calculate factor, you can use e.DistanceRatio;
It can be used itself as factor, but you can multiply it by a constant if you want to increase(e.g. 1.2) or decrease (0.8) the speed of zooming.
Related
(More info at end)----->
I am trying to render a small picture-in-picture display over my scene. The PiP is just a smaller texture, but it is intended to reveal secret objects in the scene when it is placed over them.
To do this, I want to render my scene, then render the SAME scene on the smaller texture, but with the exact same positioning as the main scene. The intended result would be something like this:
My problem is... I cannot get the scene on the smaller texture to match up 1:1. I keep trying various kludges, but ultimately I suspect that I need to do something to the projection matrix to pan it over to the location of the frame. I can get it to zoom correctly...just can't get it to pan.
Can anyone suggest what I need to do to my projection matrix to render my scene 1:1 (but panned by x,y) onto a smaller texture?
The data I have:
Resolution of the full-screen framebuffer
Resolution of the smaller texture
XY coordinate where I want to draw the smaller texture as an overlay sprite
The world/view/projection matrices from the original full-screen scene
The viewport from the original full-screen scene
(Edit)
Here is the function I use to produce the 3D camera:
void Make3DCamera(Vector theCameraPos, Vector theLookAt, Vector theUpVector, float theFOV, Point theRez, Matrix& theViewMatrix,Matrix& theProjectionMatrix)
{
Matrix aCombinedViewMatrix;
Matrix aViewMatrix;
aCombinedViewMatrix.Scale(1,1,-1);
theCameraPos.mZ*=-1;
theLookAt.mZ*=-1;
theUpVector.mZ*=-1;
aCombinedViewMatrix.Translate(-theCameraPos);
Vector aLookAtVector=theLookAt-theCameraPos;
Vector aSideVector=theUpVector.Cross(aLookAtVector);
theUpVector=aLookAtVector.Cross(aSideVector);
aLookAtVector.Normalize();
aSideVector.Normalize();
theUpVector.Normalize();
aViewMatrix.mData.m[0][0] = -aSideVector.mX;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[1][0] = -aSideVector.mY;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[2][0] = -aSideVector.mZ;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[3][0] = 0;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[0][1] = -theUpVector.mX;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[1][1] = -theUpVector.mY;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[2][1] = -theUpVector.mZ;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[3][1] = 0;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[0][2] = aLookAtVector.mX;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[1][2] = aLookAtVector.mY;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[2][2] = aLookAtVector.mZ;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[3][2] = 0;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[0][3] = 0;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[1][3] = 0;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[2][3] = 0;
aViewMatrix.mData.m[3][3] = 1;
if (gG.mRenderToSprite) aViewMatrix.Scale(1,-1,1);
aCombinedViewMatrix*=aViewMatrix;
// Projection Matrix
float aAspect = (float) theRez.mX / (float) theRez.mY;
float aNear = gG.mZRange.mData1;
float aFar = gG.mZRange.mData2;
float aWidth = gMath.Cos(theFOV / 2.0f);
float aHeight = gMath.Cos(theFOV / 2.0f);
if (aAspect > 1.0) aWidth /= aAspect;
else aHeight *= aAspect;
float s = gMath.Sin(theFOV / 2.0f);
float d = 1.0f - aNear / aFar;
Matrix aPerspectiveMatrix;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[0][0] = aWidth;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[1][0] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[2][0] = gG.m3DOffset.mX/theRez.mX/2;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[3][0] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[0][1] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[1][1] = aHeight;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[2][1] = gG.m3DOffset.mY/theRez.mY/2;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[3][1] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[0][2] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[1][2] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[2][2] = s / d;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[3][2] = -(s * aNear / d);
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[0][3] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[1][3] = 0;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[2][3] = s;
aPerspectiveMatrix.mData.m[3][3] = 0;
theViewMatrix=aCombinedViewMatrix;
theProjectionMatrix=aPerspectiveMatrix;
}
Edit to add more information:
Just playing and tweaking numbers, I have come to a "close" result. However the "close" result requires a multiplication by some kludge numbers, that I don't understand.
Here's what I'm doing to to perspective matrix to produce my close result:
//Before calling Make3DCamera, adjusting FOV:
aFOV*=smallerTexture.HeightF()/normalRenderSize.HeightF(); // Zoom it
aFOV*=1.02f // <- WTH is this?
//Then, to pan the camera over to the x/y position I want, I do:
Matrix aPM=GetCurrentProjectionMatrix();
float aX=(screenX-normalRenderSize.WidthF()/2.0f)/2.0f;
float aY=(screenY-normalRenderSize.HeightF()/2.0f)/2.0f;
aX*=1.07f; // <- WTH is this?
aY*=1.07f; // <- WTH is this?
aPM.mData.m[2][0]=-aX/normalRenderSize.HeightF();
aPM.mData.m[2][1]=-aY/normalRenderSize.HeightF();
SetCurrentProjectionMatrix(aPM);
When I do this, my new picture is VERY close... but not exactly perfect-- the small render tends to drift away from "center" the further the "magic window" is from the center. Without the kludge number, the drift away from center with the magic window is very pronounced.
The kludge numbers 1.02f for zoom and 1.07 for pan reduce the inaccuracies and drift to a fraction of a pixel, but those numbers must be a ratio from somewhere, right? They work at ANY RESOLUTION, though-- so I have have a 1280x800 screen and a 256,256 magic window texture... if I change the screen to 1024x768, it all still works.
Where the heck are these numbers coming from?
If you don't care about sub-optimal performance (i.e., drawing the whole scene twice) and if you don't need the smaller scene in a texture, an easy way to obtain the overlay with pixel perfect precision is:
Set up main scene (model/view/projection matrices, etc.) and draw it as you are now.
Use glScissor to set the rectangle for the overlay. glScissor takes the screen-space x, y, width, and height and discards anything outside that rectangle. It looks like you have those four data items already, so you should be good to go.
Call glEnable(GL_SCISSOR_TEST) to actually turn on the test.
Set the shader variables (if you're using shaders) for drawing the greyscale scene/hidden objects/etc. You still use the same view and projection matrices that you used for the main scene.
Draw the greyscale scene/hidden objects/etc.
Call glDisable(GL_SCISSOR_TEST) so you won't be scissoring at the start of the next frame.
Draw the red overlay border, if desired.
Now, if you actually need the overlay in its own texture for some reason, this probably won't be adequate...it could be made to work either with framebuffer objects and/or pixel readback, but this would be less efficient.
Most people completely overcomplicate such issues. There is absolutely no magic to applying transformations after applying the projection matrix.
If you have a projection matrix P (and I'm assuming default OpenGL conventions here where P is constructed in a way that the vector is post-multiplied to the matrix, so for an eye space vector v_eye, we get v_clip = P * v_eye), you can simply pre-multiply some other translate and scale transforms to cut out any region of interest.
Assume you have a viewport of size w_view * h_view pixels, and you want to find a projection matrix which renders only a tile w_tile * h_tile pixels , beginning at pixel location (x_tile, y_tile) (again, assuming default GL conventions here, window space origin is bottom left, so y_tile is measured from the bottom). Also note that the _tile coordinates are to be interpreted relative to the viewport, in the typical case, that would start at (0,0) and have the size of your full framebuffer, but this is by no means required nor assumed here.
Since after applying the projection matrix we are in clip space, we need to transform our coordinates from window space pixels to clip space. Note that clip space is a 4D homogeneous space, but we can use any w value we like (except 0) to represent any point (as a point in the 3D space we care about forms a line in the 4D space we work in), so let's just use w=1 for simplicity's sake.
The view volume in clip space is denoted by the [-w,w] range, so in the w=1 hyperplane, it is [-1,1]. Converting our tile into this space yields:
x_clip = 2 * (x_tile / w_view) -1
y_clip = 2 * (y_tile / h_view) -1
w_clip = 2 * (w_tile / w_view) -1
h_clip = 2 * (h_tile / h_view) -1
We now just need to translate the objects such that the center of the tile is moved to the center of the view volume, which by definition is the origin, and scale the w_clip * h_clip sized region to the full [-1,1] extent in each dimension.
That means:
T = translate(-(x_clip + 0.5*w_clip), -(y_clip + 0.5 *h_clip), 0)
S = scale(2.0/w_clip, 2.0/h_clip, 1.0)
We can now create the modified projection matrix P' as P' = S * T * P, and that's all there is. Rendering with P' instead of P will render exactly the region of your tile to whatever viewport you are using, so for it to be pixel-exact with respect to your original viewport, you must now render with a viewport which is also w_tile * h_tile pixels big.
Note that there is also another approach: The viewport is not clamped against the framebuffer you're rendering to. It is actually valid to provide negative values for x and y. If your framebuffer for rendering your tile into is exactly w_tile * h_tile pixels, you simply could set glViewport(-x_tile, -y_tile, x_tile + w_tile, y_tile + h_tile) and render with the unmodified projection matrix P instead.
Is there any way that I can focus into d3 world Map around a specific latitude and longitude on load of file.
Here is working plunker in which I can zoom around a d3 world Map.
plunker
Below code is used to zoom in for click.
function clicked() {
currScale2 = projection.scale();
if(beforeClickValue == 0)
beforeClickValue = 150;
beforeClickValue = beforeClickValue + 100;
projection.scale(beforeClickValue);
g.selectAll("path").attr("d", path);
}
I need to zoom in near or around Kenya, if I provide a particular location in Kenya, eg:
Latitude 0.55378653650984688
Longitude 35.661578039749543
If your centering point is determined by a feature
If your point is a feature centroid, then you can automatically center your map using that feature:
There are a few ways to achieve this, one would be to set your projection to be centered on your features:
projection.fitSize([width,height],geoJSONKenyaTurkana);
fitSize takes the width and height of a bounding box - your svg - and sets the scale and translate of the projection to maximize the size of the features within that bounding box. .fitExtent will allow a bit more flexibility regarding margins:
projection.fitExtent([[10,10],[width-10,height-10]],geoJSONKenyaTurkana);
This will provide margins of 10 pixels: the first coordinate is the top left of the bounding box, while the second coordinate is the bottom right.
After setting your projection to be centered with either method, then you can append the features - your zoom constraints, however, will be relative to this starting point - as you have zoomed in on the projection. Here's a plunkr with this approach (using fitSize):
https://plnkr.co/edit/E7vqcwwISmmxUarCsWvw?p=preview
I've used your featureCollection as the feature, but you could center it on an individual feature in the feature collection.
Alternatively, and possibly more in line with your title, you can use a zoom identity to set the intitial zoom factor with d3.zoom, this manipulates the svg rather than the projection and uses your zoom function:
var bounds = path.bounds(geoJSONKenyaTurkana),
dx = bounds[1][0] - bounds[0][0],
dy = bounds[1][1] - bounds[0][1],
x = (bounds[0][0] + bounds[1][0]) / 2,
y = (bounds[0][1] + bounds[1][1]) / 2,
scale = .9 / Math.max(dx / width, dy / height),
translate = [width / 2 - scale * x, height / 2 - scale * y];
svg.call(_zoom.transform, d3.zoomIdentity
.scale(scale)
.translate(translate[0]/scale,translate[1]/scale)
);
This gives us something that looks like this:
https://plnkr.co/edit/CpL4EDUntz853WzrjtU0?p=preview
If you want to manually set a centering point
If however, you want to set your map to be centered according to a manually set point, you can accomplish this much the same way as above: modifying the projection, or modifying the zoom:
To modify the projection, you can use .center() which takes a coordinate and centers the map on this point:
projection.center([longitude,latitude])
Of course, points don't have area, so you will have to set the scale factor yourself, the value will depend on what you want to show:
projection.center([longitude,latitude]).scale(k);
Larger values are more zoomed in.
Alternatively, to manipulate the zoom function, we can use something like:
var x = projection([35.661578039749543,0.55])[0],
y = projection([35.661578039749543,0.55])[1],
scale = 20,
translate = [width / 2 - scale * x, height / 2 - scale * y];
svg.call(_zoom.transform, d3.zoomIdentity
.scale(scale)
.translate(translate[0]/scale,translate[1]/scale)
);
As with setting the projection to center on a specific point, you'll need to set a scale value manually. Here I've arbitrarily chosen 20.
I am trying to model a galaxy that displays some stars. The planets are children of the star mesh.
When you zoom, the star mesh gets bigger but I want at a certain zoom level, that the star remains the same size and only the planets increase in reference to the zoom scale.
This code is working just fine, but I am wondering if this is the best way and maybe there is another, better way to achieve this:
var scale = instance.controls.scale;
obj.scale.set(obj.scale.x*scale,obj.scale.y*scale,obj.scale.z*scale);
for (var c = 0; c < obj.children.length; c++) {
var child = obj.children[c];
child.scale.set(child.scale.x/scale,child.scale.y/scale,child.scale.z/scale);
}
The scale variable comes from the camera control that informs me how much zoom is applied. Zoom in will result in scale > 1 and scale out will result in scale < 1
In order to keep my star the same size if I zoom, I have to multiply it by the scale factor but because my planets are children of the star, I need to negate the scaling by doing the opposite.
Add an extra container between the parent object and the children, like so:
var container = new THREE.Group();
obj.add( container );
containter.add( child );
Then,
obj.scale.multiplyScalar( scale );
container.scale.divideScalar( scale );
three.js r.71
I have a d3.js graph that is a forced layout design. I have allowed for users to zoom in and out of the graph with bounds set so they can't zoom in past 1 and can't zoom out past 0.1. Right now, when I plot values on the graph, I automatically send them to the center of the graph (based on the height and width of the SVG container). This works fine until I zoom out then zoom in to some where else and plot a new node. The new node will end up back at the original center and not my new relative center.
How I scale when zooming right now:
function onZoom() {
graph.attr("transform", "translate(" + zoom.translate() + ")" + " scale(" + zoom.scale() + ")");
}
I was unable to find any calls to get the current visible coordinates of the graph, but even with those, how would I use them to calculate the relative center of the graph if my SVG graph size always remains static?
I know this post is very old but I found it useful. Below is the update for d3 v5.
var el = d3.select('#canvas').node().getBoundingClientRect();
var z = d3.zoomTransform(svg.node());
var w = el.width;
var h = el.height;
var center = {
x: (z.x / z.k * -1) + (w / z.k * 0.5),
y: (z.y / z.k * -1) + (h / z.k * 0.5)
};
One thing of note, however... is that I found I also needed to divide the pan x/y by the scale factor z.k. Which, you did not do in your formula.
For simple geometric zoom, it's fairly straightforward to figure out the visible area from the visible area dimensions plus the translation and scale settings. Just remember that the translation setting is the position of the (0,0) origin relative to the top left corner of your display, so if translation is (-100,50), that means that top left corner is at (+100,-50) in your coordinate system. Likewise, if the scale is 2, that means that the visible area covers 1/2 as many units as the original width and height.
How to access the current transformation? graph.attr("transform") will give you the most recently set transform attribute string, but then you'll need to use regular expressions to access the numbers. Easier to query the zoom behaviour directly using zoom.translate() and zoom.scale().
With those together, you get
var viewCenter = [];
viewCenter[0] = (-1)*zoom.translate()[0] + (0.5) * ( width/zoom.scale() );
viewCenter[1] = (-1)*zoom.translate()[1] + (0.5) * ( height/zoom.scale() );
I.e., the position of the center of the visible area is the position of the top-left corner of the visible area, plus half the visible width and height.
Alpha invisibility.
I currently define circular regions on some images as "hot spots". For instance, I could have my photo on screen and overlay a circle on my head. To check for interaction with my head in realtime, I would returnOverlaps and do some manipulation on all objects overlapping the circle. For debugging, I make the circle yellow with alpha 0.5, and for release I decrease alpha to 0, making the circle invisible (as it should be).
Does this slow down the program? Is there another way to make the circle itself invisible while still remaining capable of interaction? Is there some way to color it "invisible" without using a (potentially) costly alpha of 0? Cache as bitmap matrix? Or some other efficient way to solve the "hot spot" detection without using masks?
Having just a few invisible display objects should not slow it down that much, but having many could. I think a more cleaner option may be to just handle it all in code, rather then have actual invisible display objects on the stage.
For a circle, you would define the center point and radius. Then to get if anyone clicked on it, you could go:
var xDist:Number = circle.x - mousePoint.x;
var yDist:Number = circle.y - mousePoint.y;
if((xDist * xDist) + (yDist * yDist) <= (circle.radius * circle.radius)){
// mousePoint is within circle
} else {
// mousePoint is outside of circle
}
If you insist on using display objects to set these circular hit areas (sometimes it can be easier visually, then by numbers), you could also write some code to read those display objects (and remove them from being rendered) in to get their positions and radius size.
added method:
// inputX and inputY are the hotspot's x and y positions, and inputRadius is the radius of the hotspot
function hitTestObj(inputA:DisplayObject, inputX:int, inputY:int, inputRadius:int):Boolean {
var xDist:Number = inputX - inputA.x;
var yDist:Number = inputY - inputA.y;
var minDist:Number = inputRadius + (inputA.width / 2);
return (((xDist * xDist) + (yDist * yDist)) =< (minDist * minDist))
}
An alpha=0 isn't all that costly in terms of rendering as Flash player will optimize for that (check here for actual figures). Bitmap caching wouldn't be of any help as the sprite is invisible. There's other ways to perform collision detection by doing the math yourself (more relevant in games with tens or even hundreds of sprites) but that would be an overkill in your case.