Sign in to follow this  
gohkgohk

OpenGL OpenGL in 2D

Recommended Posts

I am trying to write a 2D opengl program But when i draw a triangle and then i want to use a bigger square to cover it. It doesn't work. The triangle displays in front of the square. Who can the program display the 2d objects(which have the same z-coordinate) according to the sequence of drawing in 2D? Thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem you are describing has to do with the current depth buffer settings.

Right now you might have code that sets up the depth buffer like
glEnable(GL_DEPTH_TEST);
glDepthFunc(GL_LESS);
glClearDepth(1.f);

If you perform depth testing, your drawing order won't matter since the objects are sorted by the depth. Instead, you should not enable depth testing so the objects are drawn in the order they are coded. Here is a complete example using SFML with OpenGL.



////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Headers
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
#include <SFML/Graphics.hpp>
#include <iostream>

#pragma comment(lib, "sfml-graphics-s-d.lib")
#pragma comment(lib, "sfml-window-s-d.lib")
#pragma comment(lib, "sfml-system-s-d.lib")
#pragma comment(lib, "glu32.lib")

// http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=104791
void glEnable2D()
{
int vPort[4];
glGetIntegerv(GL_VIEWPORT, vPort);
glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION);
glPushMatrix();
glLoadIdentity();
glOrtho(0, vPort[2], 0, vPort[3], -1, 1);
glMatrixMode(GL_MODELVIEW);
glPushMatrix();
glLoadIdentity();
}

// http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=104791
void glDisable2D()
{
glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION);
glPopMatrix();
glMatrixMode(GL_MODELVIEW);
glPopMatrix();
}

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/// Entry point of application
///
/// \return Application exit code
///
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
int main()
{
// Create main window
sf::RenderWindow App(sf::VideoMode(800, 600), "SFML OpenGL");
App.PreserveOpenGLStates(true);

// Enable Z-buffer read and write
//glEnable(GL_DEPTH_TEST);
//glDepthFunc(GL_LESS);
//glClearDepth(1.f);

// Start game loop
while (App.IsOpened())
{
// Process events
sf::Event Event;
while (App.GetEvent(Event))
{
// Close window : exit
if (Event.Type == sf::Event::Closed)
App.Close();

// Escape key : exit
if ((Event.Type == sf::Event::KeyPressed) && (Event.Key.Code == sf::Key::Escape))
App.Close();

// Adjust the viewport when the window is resized
if (Event.Type == sf::Event::Resized)
glViewport(0, 0, Event.Size.Width, Event.Size.Height);
}

glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT| GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT);
glLoadIdentity();

glEnable2D();
// The red triangle is drawn first at an offset so we can see
// the green rectangle draws on top of it
glTranslated(0, 75, 0);
glBegin(GL_TRIANGLES);
glColor3ub(255, 0, 0); glVertex2d(0, 0);
glColor3ub(255, 0, 0); glVertex2d(100, 0);
glColor3ub(255, 0, 0); glVertex2d(50, 50);
glEnd();
glTranslated(0, -75, 0);

// The green rectangle will cover the red triangle
glBegin(GL_QUADS);
glColor3ub(0, 255, 0); glVertex2d(0, 0);
glColor3ub(0, 255, 0); glVertex2d(100, 0);
glColor3ub(0, 255, 0); glVertex2d(100, 100);
glColor3ub(0, 255, 0); glVertex2d(0, 100);
glEnd();

// We should see this one on top of the green rectangle
glTranslated(50, 0, 0);
glBegin(GL_TRIANGLES);
glColor3ub(0, 0, 255); glVertex2d(0, 0);
glColor3ub(0, 0, 255); glVertex2d(100, 0);
glColor3ub(0, 0, 255); glVertex2d(50, 50);
glEnd();
glDisable2D();

// Finally, display the rendered frame on screen
App.Display();
}

return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}



Here's the program's output as well as a second output when taking out the green rectangle.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Drew_Benton
The problem you are describing has to do with the current depth buffer settings.

Right now you might have code that sets up the depth buffer like
glEnable(GL_DEPTH_TEST);
glDepthFunc(GL_LESS);
glClearDepth(1.f);

If you perform depth testing, your drawing order won't matter since the objects are sorted by the depth. Instead, you should not enable depth testing so the objects are drawn in the order they are coded. Here is a complete example using SFML with OpenGL.

*** Source Snippet Removed ***

Here's the program's output as well as a second output when taking out the green rectangle.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us


thx~it works

But Can i work with object picking(glRenderMode(GL_SELECT);) when depth test turn off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by gohkgohk
But Can i work with object picking(glRenderMode(GL_SELECT);) when depth test turn off?


Ah, an unfortunate side affect for my simple solution [lol]

Here's the problem I see with that technique. If two objects have the same depth, which one is the closer one? The result should be undefined, because which one draws last is irrelevant to OpenGL since depth is sorted by the Z value. (OpenGL gurus correct me if I am mistaken).

When you have your picking logic, which I would assume looks like this or this, you could depth test only for the picking mode, but you are left with the problem you first saw visually, the triangle is on top of the square. When you went to click on the square, there's a good chance you are actually picking the triangle because that was the object that had the closest depth, so to speak.

Instead, I think you should be implementing a custom solution that you track the positions of your objects as well as an incrementing draw index. This way, when the user clicks on the screen, you take the mouse click coords, let's say 100, 100, then find if that point is on the inside of any of your objects. If it is, you track the object with the largest draw index, which would represent the object "on top" and that's the object you process.

Alternatively, you can do this, keep depth testing, but set the Z index with the "draw index" so you can "properly" use OpenGL. I.e.

glTranslated(0, 0, .1)
... Obj 1
glTranslated(0, 0, .2)
... Obj 2
glTranslated(0, 0, .3)
... Obj 3
etc...

Those are my two best ideas currently, maybe someone else has an idea [smile]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Drew_Benton
Quote:
Original post by gohkgohk
But Can i work with object picking(glRenderMode(GL_SELECT);) when depth test turn off?


Ah, an unfortunate side affect for my simple solution [lol]

Here's the problem I see with that technique. If two objects have the same depth, which one is the closer one? The result should be undefined, because which one draws last is irrelevant to OpenGL since depth is sorted by the Z value. (OpenGL gurus correct me if I am mistaken).

The depth buffer is irrelevant to picking. The built in picking method is completely geometry based, and hits are recorded based on whether the objects intersects the clip volume or not. Therefore, hits are recorded before rasterization, and before the depth buffer has anything to say.

Relative depth order is also irrelevant for picking if it's inside the clip volume. Along with what objects that actually made a hit record, you also find the maximum and minimum depth values for that hit record. So if you have two objects at exactly the same depth, you will just have two hit record with exactly the same depth.

The hit record is also recorded in order of drawing, so if you need closest hit, or something else, it's up to you to use the depth information in the hit record to select the desired hit.

So to conclude, since picking occurs even before rasterization, depth and depth buffer settings have absolutely no influence on picking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Brother Bob
Quote:
Original post by Drew_Benton
Quote:
Original post by gohkgohk
But Can i work with object picking(glRenderMode(GL_SELECT);) when depth test turn off?


Ah, an unfortunate side affect for my simple solution [lol]

Here's the problem I see with that technique. If two objects have the same depth, which one is the closer one? The result should be undefined, because which one draws last is irrelevant to OpenGL since depth is sorted by the Z value. (OpenGL gurus correct me if I am mistaken).

The depth buffer is irrelevant to picking. The built in picking method is completely geometry based, and hits are recorded based on whether the objects intersects the clip volume or not. Therefore, hits are recorded before rasterization, and before the depth buffer has anything to say.

Relative depth order is also irrelevant for picking if it's inside the clip volume. Along with what objects that actually made a hit record, you also find the maximum and minimum depth values for that hit record. So if you have two objects at exactly the same depth, you will just have two hit record with exactly the same depth.

The hit record is also recorded in order of drawing, so if you need closest hit, or something else, it's up to you to use the depth information in the hit record to select the desired hit.

So to conclude, since picking occurs even before rasterization, depth and depth buffer settings have absolutely no influence on picking.


Yes! Thx!
Now no need to sort the buffer too, because all have the same z.
that means the last one in the buffer is the latest one which i draw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      628308
    • Total Posts
      2981979
  • Similar Content

    • By mellinoe
      Hi all,
      First time poster here, although I've been reading posts here for quite a while. This place has been invaluable for learning graphics programming -- thanks for a great resource!
      Right now, I'm working on a graphics abstraction layer for .NET which supports D3D11, Vulkan, and OpenGL at the moment. I have implemented most of my planned features already, and things are working well. Some remaining features that I am planning are Compute Shaders, and some flavor of read-write shader resources. At the moment, my shaders can just get simple read-only access to a uniform (or constant) buffer, a texture, or a sampler. Unfortunately, I'm having a tough time grasping the distinctions between all of the different kinds of read-write resources that are available. In D3D alone, there seem to be 5 or 6 different kinds of resources with similar but different characteristics. On top of that, I get the impression that some of them are more or less "obsoleted" by the newer kinds, and don't have much of a place in modern code. There seem to be a few pivots:
      The data source/destination (buffer or texture) Read-write or read-only Structured or unstructured (?) Ordered vs unordered (?) These are just my observations based on a lot of MSDN and OpenGL doc reading. For my library, I'm not interested in exposing every possibility to the user -- just trying to find a good "middle-ground" that can be represented cleanly across API's which is good enough for common scenarios.
      Can anyone give a sort of "overview" of the different options, and perhaps compare/contrast the concepts between Direct3D, OpenGL, and Vulkan? I'd also be very interested in hearing how other folks have abstracted these concepts in their libraries.
    • By aejt
      I recently started getting into graphics programming (2nd try, first try was many years ago) and I'm working on a 3d rendering engine which I hope to be able to make a 3D game with sooner or later. I have plenty of C++ experience, but not a lot when it comes to graphics, and while it's definitely going much better this time, I'm having trouble figuring out how assets are usually handled by engines.
      I'm not having trouble with handling the GPU resources, but more so with how the resources should be defined and used in the system (materials, models, etc).
      This is my plan now, I've implemented most of it except for the XML parts and factories and those are the ones I'm not sure of at all:
      I have these classes:
      For GPU resources:
      Geometry: holds and manages everything needed to render a geometry: VAO, VBO, EBO. Texture: holds and manages a texture which is loaded into the GPU. Shader: holds and manages a shader which is loaded into the GPU. For assets relying on GPU resources:
      Material: holds a shader resource, multiple texture resources, as well as uniform settings. Mesh: holds a geometry and a material. Model: holds multiple meshes, possibly in a tree structure to more easily support skinning later on? For handling GPU resources:
      ResourceCache<T>: T can be any resource loaded into the GPU. It owns these resources and only hands out handles to them on request (currently string identifiers are used when requesting handles, but all resources are stored in a vector and each handle only contains resource's index in that vector) Resource<T>: The handles given out from ResourceCache. The handles are reference counted and to get the underlying resource you simply deference like with pointers (*handle).  
      And my plan is to define everything into these XML documents to abstract away files:
      Resources.xml for ref-counted GPU resources (geometry, shaders, textures) Resources are assigned names/ids and resource files, and possibly some attributes (what vertex attributes does this geometry have? what vertex attributes does this shader expect? what uniforms does this shader use? and so on) Are reference counted using ResourceCache<T> Assets.xml for assets using the GPU resources (materials, meshes, models) Assets are not reference counted, but they hold handles to ref-counted resources. References the resources defined in Resources.xml by names/ids. The XMLs are loaded into some structure in memory which is then used for loading the resources/assets using factory classes:
      Factory classes for resources:
      For example, a texture factory could contain the texture definitions from the XML containing data about textures in the game, as well as a cache containing all loaded textures. This means it has mappings from each name/id to a file and when asked to load a texture with a name/id, it can look up its path and use a "BinaryLoader" to either load the file and create the resource directly, or asynchronously load the file's data into a queue which then can be read from later to create the resources synchronously in the GL context. These factories only return handles.
      Factory classes for assets:
      Much like for resources, these classes contain the definitions for the assets they can load. For example, with the definition the MaterialFactory will know which shader, textures and possibly uniform a certain material has, and with the help of TextureFactory and ShaderFactory, it can retrieve handles to the resources it needs (Shader + Textures), setup itself from XML data (uniform values), and return a created instance of requested material. These factories return actual instances, not handles (but the instances contain handles).
       
       
      Is this a good or commonly used approach? Is this going to bite me in the ass later on? Are there other more preferable approaches? Is this outside of the scope of a 3d renderer and should be on the engine side? I'd love to receive and kind of advice or suggestions!
      Thanks!
    • By nedondev
      I 'm learning how to create game by using opengl with c/c++ coding, so here is my fist game. In video description also have game contain in Dropbox. May be I will make it better in future.
      Thanks.
    • By Abecederia
      So I've recently started learning some GLSL and now I'm toying with a POM shader. I'm trying to optimize it and notice that it starts having issues at high texture sizes, especially with self-shadowing.
      Now I know POM is expensive either way, but would pulling the heightmap out of the normalmap alpha channel and in it's own 8bit texture make doing all those dozens of texture fetches more cheap? Or is everything in the cache aligned to 32bit anyway? I haven't implemented texture compression yet, I think that would help? But regardless, should there be a performance boost from decoupling the heightmap? I could also keep it in a lower resolution than the normalmap if that would improve performance.
      Any help is much appreciated, please keep in mind I'm somewhat of a newbie. Thanks!
    • By test opty
      Hi,
      I'm trying to learn OpenGL through a website and have proceeded until this page of it. The output is a simple triangle. The problem is the complexity.
      I have read that page several times and tried to analyse the code but I haven't understood the code properly and completely yet. This is the code:
       
      #include <glad/glad.h> #include <GLFW/glfw3.h> #include <C:\Users\Abbasi\Desktop\std_lib_facilities_4.h> using namespace std; //****************************************************************************** void framebuffer_size_callback(GLFWwindow* window, int width, int height); void processInput(GLFWwindow *window); // settings const unsigned int SCR_WIDTH = 800; const unsigned int SCR_HEIGHT = 600; const char *vertexShaderSource = "#version 330 core\n" "layout (location = 0) in vec3 aPos;\n" "void main()\n" "{\n" " gl_Position = vec4(aPos.x, aPos.y, aPos.z, 1.0);\n" "}\0"; const char *fragmentShaderSource = "#version 330 core\n" "out vec4 FragColor;\n" "void main()\n" "{\n" " FragColor = vec4(1.0f, 0.5f, 0.2f, 1.0f);\n" "}\n\0"; //******************************* int main() { // glfw: initialize and configure // ------------------------------ glfwInit(); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_CONTEXT_VERSION_MAJOR, 3); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_CONTEXT_VERSION_MINOR, 3); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_OPENGL_PROFILE, GLFW_OPENGL_CORE_PROFILE); // glfw window creation GLFWwindow* window = glfwCreateWindow(SCR_WIDTH, SCR_HEIGHT, "My First Triangle", nullptr, nullptr); if (window == nullptr) { cout << "Failed to create GLFW window" << endl; glfwTerminate(); return -1; } glfwMakeContextCurrent(window); glfwSetFramebufferSizeCallback(window, framebuffer_size_callback); // glad: load all OpenGL function pointers if (!gladLoadGLLoader((GLADloadproc)glfwGetProcAddress)) { cout << "Failed to initialize GLAD" << endl; return -1; } // build and compile our shader program // vertex shader int vertexShader = glCreateShader(GL_VERTEX_SHADER); glShaderSource(vertexShader, 1, &vertexShaderSource, nullptr); glCompileShader(vertexShader); // check for shader compile errors int success; char infoLog[512]; glGetShaderiv(vertexShader, GL_COMPILE_STATUS, &success); if (!success) { glGetShaderInfoLog(vertexShader, 512, nullptr, infoLog); cout << "ERROR::SHADER::VERTEX::COMPILATION_FAILED\n" << infoLog << endl; } // fragment shader int fragmentShader = glCreateShader(GL_FRAGMENT_SHADER); glShaderSource(fragmentShader, 1, &fragmentShaderSource, nullptr); glCompileShader(fragmentShader); // check for shader compile errors glGetShaderiv(fragmentShader, GL_COMPILE_STATUS, &success); if (!success) { glGetShaderInfoLog(fragmentShader, 512, nullptr, infoLog); cout << "ERROR::SHADER::FRAGMENT::COMPILATION_FAILED\n" << infoLog << endl; } // link shaders int shaderProgram = glCreateProgram(); glAttachShader(shaderProgram, vertexShader); glAttachShader(shaderProgram, fragmentShader); glLinkProgram(shaderProgram); // check for linking errors glGetProgramiv(shaderProgram, GL_LINK_STATUS, &success); if (!success) { glGetProgramInfoLog(shaderProgram, 512, nullptr, infoLog); cout << "ERROR::SHADER::PROGRAM::LINKING_FAILED\n" << infoLog << endl; } glDeleteShader(vertexShader); glDeleteShader(fragmentShader); // set up vertex data (and buffer(s)) and configure vertex attributes float vertices[] = { -0.5f, -0.5f, 0.0f, // left 0.5f, -0.5f, 0.0f, // right 0.0f, 0.5f, 0.0f // top }; unsigned int VBO, VAO; glGenVertexArrays(1, &VAO); glGenBuffers(1, &VBO); // bind the Vertex Array Object first, then bind and set vertex buffer(s), //and then configure vertex attributes(s). glBindVertexArray(VAO); glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, VBO); glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, sizeof(vertices), vertices, GL_STATIC_DRAW); glVertexAttribPointer(0, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, 3 * sizeof(float), (void*)0); glEnableVertexAttribArray(0); // note that this is allowed, the call to glVertexAttribPointer registered VBO // as the vertex attribute's bound vertex buffer object so afterwards we can safely unbind glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, 0); // You can unbind the VAO afterwards so other VAO calls won't accidentally // modify this VAO, but this rarely happens. Modifying other // VAOs requires a call to glBindVertexArray anyways so we generally don't unbind // VAOs (nor VBOs) when it's not directly necessary. glBindVertexArray(0); // uncomment this call to draw in wireframe polygons. //glPolygonMode(GL_FRONT_AND_BACK, GL_LINE); // render loop while (!glfwWindowShouldClose(window)) { // input // ----- processInput(window); // render // ------ glClearColor(0.2f, 0.3f, 0.3f, 1.0f); glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT); // draw our first triangle glUseProgram(shaderProgram); glBindVertexArray(VAO); // seeing as we only have a single VAO there's no need to // bind it every time, but we'll do so to keep things a bit more organized glDrawArrays(GL_TRIANGLES, 0, 3); // glBindVertexArray(0); // no need to unbind it every time // glfw: swap buffers and poll IO events (keys pressed/released, mouse moved etc.) glfwSwapBuffers(window); glfwPollEvents(); } // optional: de-allocate all resources once they've outlived their purpose: glDeleteVertexArrays(1, &VAO); glDeleteBuffers(1, &VBO); // glfw: terminate, clearing all previously allocated GLFW resources. glfwTerminate(); return 0; } //************************************************** // process all input: query GLFW whether relevant keys are pressed/released // this frame and react accordingly void processInput(GLFWwindow *window) { if (glfwGetKey(window, GLFW_KEY_ESCAPE) == GLFW_PRESS) glfwSetWindowShouldClose(window, true); } //******************************************************************** // glfw: whenever the window size changed (by OS or user resize) this callback function executes void framebuffer_size_callback(GLFWwindow* window, int width, int height) { // make sure the viewport matches the new window dimensions; note that width and // height will be significantly larger than specified on retina displays. glViewport(0, 0, width, height); } As you see, about 200 lines of complicated code only for a simple triangle. 
      I don't know what parts are necessary for that output. And also, what the correct order of instructions for such an output or programs is, generally. That start point is too complex for a beginner of OpenGL like me and I don't know how to make the issue solved. What are your ideas please? What is the way to figure both the code and the whole program out correctly please?
      I wish I'd read a reference that would teach me OpenGL through a step-by-step method. 
  • Popular Now