# OpenGL OpenGL Matrix

## Recommended Posts

Hello,

I am reading a book called "OpenGL SuperBible 5th Edition" and the page 158 tries to explain matrices.
Actually I have a solid understanding of matrices (worked a lot with Direct3D), but this page confuses me.
The code is about a spinning torus:
m3dTranslationMatrix44(mTranslate, 0, 0, -2);m3dRotationMatrix44(mRotate, yRot, 0, 1, 0);m3dMatrixMultiply44(mModelview, mTranslate, mRotate);m3dMatrixMultiply44(mModelViewProjection, mProjectionMatrix, mModelView);
I looked at the code and tried to figure out the order of the multiplication. Since the torus is spinning around itself I thought the multiply function multiplies the 3rd argument with the 2nd argument. Thus the 3rd transformation is applied prior to the 2nd transformation. This would also explain the last code line, because the modelView Transformation has to be applied BEFORE the projection.

But now I have to read this in the book:
Quote:
 Remember, the order of operations is important, and here we first translate and then rotate the torus.m3dMatrixMultiply44(mModelview, mTranslate, mRotate);It should now be out in front of us and spinning in place...

What? If we FIRST translate and then rotate the torus will not rotate around itself rather around the origin.

Is this an error in the book or do I confuse something?

[Edited by - schupf on October 16, 2010 5:18:47 PM]

##### Share on other sites
Hello

With the OpenGL API, the matrices are column major. They are passed as an array of 16 floats (float matrix[16]) which means the elements of a matrix are ordered as follow

a0 a4 a8 a12
a1 a5 a9 a13
a2 a6 a10 a14
a3 a7 a11 a15

where the index is the index in the float array. That implies that the order of multiplication is the oposite of that used by the Direct3D API where matrices are row major.

Hope this helps.

Laval Bolduc

[Edited by - Laval B on October 16, 2010 8:16:24 PM]

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by Laval BWith the OpenGL API, the matrices are column major. They are passed as an array of 16 floats (float matrix[16]) which means the elements of a matrix are ordered as followa0 a4 a8 a12a1 a5 a9 a13a2 a6 a10 a14a3 a7 a11 a15where the index is the index in the float array. That implies that the order of multiplication is the oposite of that used by the Direct3D API where matrices are row major.
Actually, that's not correct; matrix storage order doesn't (necessarily) imply anything about multiplication order.

What you're thinking of is vector notation convention (mathematically, row vectors are multiplied to the left of matrices and column vectors to the right).

##### Share on other sites
Keep in mind that the matrices work BACKWARD from the way we would logically think of them. Reading your statement as plane English, you are correct: it makes no sense that translating THEN rotating would make the torus rotate about itself in front of the camera. However, you have to start with the torus and work backward through the matrices. With that perspective, it makes sense. It rotates first. Then it moves away. That would make it "rotate about itself".

LOGIC -- rotate, translate, move world (camera), projection
CODE -- projection, move world, translate, rotate

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by TheBuzzSawKeep in mind that the matrices work BACKWARD from the way we would logically think of them. Reading your statement as plane English, you are correct: it makes no sense that translating THEN rotating would make the torus rotate about itself in front of the camera. However, you have to start with the torus and work backward through the matrices. With that perspective, it makes sense. It rotates first. Then it moves away. That would make it "rotate about itself".LOGIC -- rotate, translate, move world (camera), projectionCODE -- projection, move world, translate, rotate

Thanks! That helped me a lot. I was used to the Direct3D matrices and to be honest I also find the D3D matrix order much more intuitive, cause the logical (plain english) order is the same as the mathematical order.

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by schupf... cause the logical (plain english) order is the same as the mathematical order.
People using a right-to-left script system may claim that "logical order" doesn't match "english order". Moreover, from the mathematical point of view, neither the one nor the other writing is incorrect or even more senseful than the other.

If you look at a 2 step transformation of a vertex v for row vectors
vr' := vr * Rr * Tr
and you look at the same transformation for column vectors
vc' := Tc * Rc * vc
then you'll notice that in both formulas the R is closer to the v than T is. This is the only important aspect! Because a transformation closer to the vector is applied in a space "more locally" than the other transformations. Hence, the transformation closest to the vector seems to be applied first, what may be expressed like so
vr' = ( vr * Rr ) * Tr
resp.
vc' = Tc * ( Rc * vc )
(although mathematically it plays no role how to set the parentheses).

##### Share on other sites
I know haegarr, but for ME row vectors (and the according "row matrices") feel more intutive.
When I want to apply a scale, then rotate than translation, I would intuitively write this on a paper:
v*S*R*T, because I read from left to write.
And thats exactly the order I set the matrices in D3D. In OpenGL I had to switch the order around, thus I have to set the T matrix first, even though mathematically it is applied last.
I know that most mathematician will probably prefer the OpenGL matrix order, but I don't like it.

##### Share on other sites
Quote:
 Original post by schupfI know that most mathematician will probably prefer the OpenGL matrix order, but I don't like it.
Fortunately, in many if not most cases, you can use whichever convention you prefer :) With OpenGL for example, you can use either row vectors or column vectors (as long as you use a math library that supports your preferred convention).

## Create an account

Register a new account

• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
628333
• Total Posts
2982139
• ### Similar Content

• Hi, New here.
I need some help. My fiance and I like to play this mobile game online that goes by real time. Her and I are always working but when we have free time we like to play this game. We don't always got time throughout the day to Queue Buildings, troops, Upgrades....etc....
I was told to look into DLL Injection and OpenGL/DirectX Hooking. Is this true? Is this what I need to learn?
How do I read the Android files, or modify the files, or get the in-game tags/variables for the game I want?
Any assistance on this would be most appreciated. I been everywhere and seems no one knows or is to lazy to help me out. It would be nice to have assistance for once. I don't know what I need to learn.
So links of topics I need to learn within the comment section would be SOOOOO.....Helpful. Anything to just get me started.
Thanks,
Dejay Hextrix
• 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.

• 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!

• 9
• 24
• 9
• 9
• 13