Sign in to follow this  
metsfan

OpenGL Up axis problem with 3d Models [OpenGL]

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

I am having a problem with a discrepancy between a set of 3D models which I have purchased and the OpenGL coordinate system. All of the models were exported with the Z axis pointing up, while OpenGL by default has the Y axis pointing up. The way I see it there are two options:

1) Modify the OpenGL coordinate system so that the Z axis points up
2) Modify the 3D models so that the Y axis points up

Neither task sounds like fun (option 1 forces me to modify the way OpenGL works by default, which I take no pleasure in doing, option 2 forces me to use a program like Maya, which I know absolutely nothing about). I'm just trying to get a sense of what is more commonplace in the game industry. Is it up to the programming team to make the coordinate system match the 3D models, or is it on the art team to make sure that the 3D models come in the proper coordinate system? Additionally, which of the 2 possibilities is the recommended path to take?

Thanks,
-Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my 3D studio max exporter I have a flag that makes Y up because Max's up is +Z. What the flag does is applies a +90 rotation about the +X axis (right handed) to the object (or models skeleton root) transform, this rotates Max's +Y (my Max forward convention) to align with opengl +Y up, and swings the Max -Z (down) up to become the opengl forward (-Z is forward in opengl for me). If the objects transform is translated away from the origin you may have to swap its z and y, and then negate the new z.

There are many places where you can solve it. Flag it on export if you can. Flag it on the model when loading. Manually rotate the object before exporting. I wouldnt mess with opengl, Id rather tweak the data. I do it this way because it doesnt have an impact on animations, its just an additional transform at the root so that objects are not on their side (or face down on floor). Overall its just a pain.

I think maya is Y up by default but can be changed, Max doesnt allow it to be changed, in case you do import into Maya, initially you might have the same problem as with opengl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for the reply, this makes a lot of sense. I wish I knew more about 3D studio max, since I have absolutely no idea how to apply a transformation on export. Are there any resources you recommend that can help me set up this modification to the exporter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The exporter is one that I wrote for Max, I added the Y up functionality because Max +Z is up, so of course any transforms or data that comes out of Max by default will be laying on its back, its face or side.
If you have models already made and dont want to or cant re-export, then the simplest way would be to rotate them in code by manipulating the objects world matrix that gets used for rendering. If you have some sort of scene graph like transform hierarchy, you can just apply the transforms i mentioned to the objects local transform then when you calculate the objects world transform for rendering it will draw correctly.
If you decide to re-export, apply the appropriate transforms at the end just before exporting. Which might mean (in the case of 3DS max) rotating the object to be face down (or up or whatever) just before exporting. I doubt anyone working on the models would want to build objects on their side, so do the flip at the end before exporting once the models done.
Which ever way you do it is gonna produce the same result, if you do and 90 degree correction in Max/Maya just before export using the rotate widget after selecting the object, the underlying operation is the same 90 degree rotation you'd be doing in code on the objects local transform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]All of the models were exported with the Z axis pointing up, while OpenGL by default has the Y axis pointing up.[/quote]
OpenGL does not specify a default up axis. It depends soley on your camera transform.

[quote]Is it up to the programming team to make the coordinate system match the 3D models, or is it on the art team to make sure that the 3D models come in the proper coordinate system? Additionally, which of the 2 possibilities is the recommended path to take?[/quote]

Both. The artists need to make sure they model things the correct way up, however the programmers should make sure that they can transform geometry. We are just talking about a 90 degree rotation around X here, so assuming you have a matrix transform for each mesh, it's not actually a problem. Mind you, writing a tool to rotate some vertices & normals in your files, is something that should only take you a couple of minutes.

[quote]I added the Y up functionality because Max +Z is up,[/quote]
Because the changing the up axis in the 3ds max properties is too hard?

[quote]Neither task sounds like fun (option 1 forces me to modify the way OpenGL works by default, which I take no pleasure in doing,[/quote]
Again, you can use any up axis you want. This is not a limitation of OpenGL.

[quote]option 2 forces me to use a program like Maya,[/quote]
No it doesn't. It means you need to use some trivial matrix maths. Using Maya/Max et al, is just over-complicating a trivial problem.

[quote]I'm just trying to get a sense of what is more commonplace in the game industry.[/quote]
Transformation matrices, and a consistant approach to working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='RobTheBloke' timestamp='1343385773' post='4963591']
[quote]option 2 forces me to use a program like Maya,[/quote]
No it doesn't. It means you need to use some trivial matrix maths. Using Maya/Max et al, is just over-complicating a trivial problem.
[/quote]
Exactly, I agree.

[quote]
OpenGL does not specify a default up axis. It depends soley on your camera transform.
[/quote]

Just some nit picking, but you can program OpenGL without any matrices or transforms at all, if you want. OpenGL no longer has a "camera transform" concept, and 'y' is up on the screen as default.

[quote name='Geometrian' timestamp='1343506211' post='4964080']
glRotated(90.0,1.0,0.0,0.0); or glRotated(-90.0,1.0,0.0,0.0)
[/quote]

This is deprecated OpenGL functionality, please don't recommend it. And if you would use it anyway, it is not recommended as it use double precision. That may cost a lot of performance. Edited by larspensjo

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  

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      627767
    • Total Posts
      2978991
  • Similar Content

    • By DelicateTreeFrog
      Hello! As an exercise for delving into modern OpenGL, I'm creating a simple .obj renderer. I want to support things like varying degrees of specularity, geometry opacity, things like that, on a per-material basis. Different materials can also have different textures. Basic .obj necessities. I've done this in old school OpenGL, but modern OpenGL has its own thing going on, and I'd like to conform as closely to the standards as possible so as to keep the program running correctly, and I'm hoping to avoid picking up bad habits this early on.
      Reading around on the OpenGL Wiki, one tip in particular really stands out to me on this page:
      For something like a renderer for .obj files, this sort of thing seems almost ideal, but according to the wiki, it's a bad idea. Interesting to note!
      So, here's what the plan is so far as far as loading goes:
      Set up a type for materials so that materials can be created and destroyed. They will contain things like diffuse color, diffuse texture, geometry opacity, and so on, for each material in the .mtl file. Since .obj files are conveniently split up by material, I can load different groups of vertices/normals/UVs and triangles into different blocks of data for different models. When it comes to the rendering, I get a bit lost. I can either:
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUseProgram to use a different shader for that particular geometry (so a unique shader just for the material that is shared by this triangle group). or
      Between drawing triangle groups, call glUniform a few times to adjust different parameters within the "master shader", such as specularity, diffuse color, and geometry opacity. In both cases, I still have to call glBindTexture between drawing triangle groups in order to bind the diffuse texture used by the material, so there doesn't seem to be a way around having the CPU do *something* during the rendering process instead of letting the GPU do everything all at once.
      The second option here seems less cluttered, however. There are less shaders to keep up with while one "master shader" handles it all. I don't have to duplicate any code or compile multiple shaders. Arguably, I could always have the shader program for each material be embedded in the material itself, and be auto-generated upon loading the material from the .mtl file. But this still leads to constantly calling glUseProgram, much more than is probably necessary in order to properly render the .obj. There seem to be a number of differing opinions on if it's okay to use hundreds of shaders or if it's best to just use tens of shaders.
      So, ultimately, what is the "right" way to do this? Does using a "master shader" (or a few variants of one) bog down the system compared to using hundreds of shader programs each dedicated to their own corresponding materials? Keeping in mind that the "master shaders" would have to track these additional uniforms and potentially have numerous branches of ifs, it may be possible that the ifs will lead to additional and unnecessary processing. But would that more expensive than constantly calling glUseProgram to switch shaders, or storing the shaders to begin with?
      With all these angles to consider, it's difficult to come to a conclusion. Both possible methods work, and both seem rather convenient for their own reasons, but which is the most performant? Please help this beginner/dummy understand. Thank you!
    • By JJCDeveloper
      I want to make professional java 3d game with server program and database,packet handling for multiplayer and client-server communicating,maps rendering,models,and stuffs Which aspect of java can I learn and where can I learn java Lwjgl OpenGL rendering Like minecraft and world of tanks
    • By AyeRonTarpas
      A friend of mine and I are making a 2D game engine as a learning experience and to hopefully build upon the experience in the long run.

      -What I'm using:
          C++;. Since im learning this language while in college and its one of the popular language to make games with why not.     Visual Studios; Im using a windows so yea.     SDL or GLFW; was thinking about SDL since i do some research on it where it is catching my interest but i hear SDL is a huge package compared to GLFW, so i may do GLFW to start with as learning since i may get overwhelmed with SDL.  
      -Questions
      Knowing what we want in the engine what should our main focus be in terms of learning. File managements, with headers, functions ect. How can i properly manage files with out confusing myself and my friend when sharing code. Alternative to Visual studios: My friend has a mac and cant properly use Vis studios, is there another alternative to it?  
    • By ferreiradaselva
      Both functions are available since 3.0, and I'm currently using `glMapBuffer()`, which works fine.
      But, I was wondering if anyone has experienced advantage in using `glMapBufferRange()`, which allows to specify the range of the mapped buffer. Could this be only a safety measure or does it improve performance?
      Note: I'm not asking about glBufferSubData()/glBufferData. Those two are irrelevant in this case.
    • By xhcao
      Before using void glBindImageTexture(    GLuint unit, GLuint texture, GLint level, GLboolean layered, GLint layer, GLenum access, GLenum format), does need to make sure that texture is completeness. 
  • Popular Now