
Advertisement
This topic is 2014 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.
If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.
Recommended Posts
BCullis 1955
All right. But then, to go from world to view wouldn't require another translation (camera position), rotation(where the camera is looking at) and scaling (zoom effects)? Or I'm missing something?
Yes, it does. I'm just saying it doesn't change "spaces" when you apply the view matrix. Like others have said, it essentially applies an inverse of the camera's position, rotation, and scale. I use helper functions like "createLookAt", but my camera stores peraxis rotations and a worldposition vector that end up being used for the calculations (world position gives the origin for the lookat vector, and the camera rotations are fed into a "CreateRotationYawPitchRoll" matrix that modifies the camera's orientation vectors (left, up, and forward)).
Gah, any more parentheses there and I'd be writing Lisp o_o
TheChubu 9480
I see. Now it makes more sense. So, where the lookat vector comes from? It is computed from mouse input?
Trienco 2555
Personally I would absolutely avoid storing angles, though it works fine for a simple FPS style camera (just make sure you always rotate around "up" first and "right" second). The simple fact is that the order in which your rotations are applied is important and completely lost if you just accumulate angles.
Also, pleaaaase don't abuse scaling to zoom. Zooming is a perspective effect and the result of focusing your lens to show a smaller area, ie. what you get by reducing your field of view. Scaling will scale your objects, can make them grow beyond your near plane or even behind your camera and suddenly zooming turns into a wall hack.
My usual camera class is using my own vector/matrix stuff, so it would be mostly useless to you, but the basic setup is that it stores a transformation matrix (4x4). All rotations and translations are directly applied and accumulated in that matrix when processing the users input. Since matrix math is neat, applying a rotation around (1,0,0) will always look up/down around your current "right", just like a translation along (1,0,0) will always strafe left/right. For the rare situations where you want to move/rotate using the world axes, you just multiply the new transformation from the other side (to visualize it, one way the rotation happens after the previous transformations, the other way it happens before... while all local axes are still aligned with the world axes).
Btw., your typical lookAt function will just build a transformation matrix from the passed vectors and then invert it, so it becomes extremely superfluous if you store the transformation matrix in the first place. Inverting it is simple, as long as you stay away from scaling.
viewMatrix = Matrix44( Transform[0], Transform[4], Transform[8], 0, Transform[1], Transform[5], Transform[9], 0, Transform[2], Transform[6], Transform[10], 0, (Transform[0]*Transform[12] + Transform[1]*Transform[13] + Transform[2]*Transform[14]), (Transform[4]*Transform[12] + Transform[5]*Transform[13] + Transform[6]*Transform[14]), (Transform[8]*Transform[12] + Transform[9]*Transform[13] + Transform[10]*Transform[14]), 1);
BCullis 1955
I see. Now it makes more sense. So, where the lookat vector comes from? It is computed from mouse input?
It depends on your implementation. I could technically say "yes" when talking about my own code, because mouse movement alters the camera's rotation, and that rotation modifies the camera's "Forward" vector, which is used together with the camera's world position to make my lookat matrix. But the DirectX LookAt method takes an origin and a destination, and calculates the matrix that would represent a view "looking at" the destination from the origin.
The following is C# code, but probably explains better than I just tried to:
(_rotation is a vector representing x, y, and zaxis rotation of the camera)
public virtual void Update(float timeDelta) { Matrix rotation = Matrix.RotationYawPitchRoll(_rotation.Y, _rotation.X, 0); _forward = Vector3.TransformCoordinate(Vector3.UnitZ, rotation); _up = Vector3.TransformCoordinate(Vector3.UnitY, rotation); _left = Vector3.Normalize(Vector3.Cross(_forward, _up)); _viewMatrix = Matrix.LookAtLH(_worldPosition, _worldPosition + _forward, _up); }Edited by BCullis
TheChubu 9480
All right. Thank you all for your answers! I'm trying to implement it right now. If I come across another rock I'll be back :D

Advertisement
Ohh, I read that somewhere in Arcsynthesis book. So, a view matrix is the inverse of the various transformation matrices that place a camera in the world? So say that I'm at (30,30,0) coords in the world, looking 45º down (rotation of 45º along a (1,0,0) unit vector), I multiply those matrices, invert the result, and I have my view matrix?
I'm reading that MSDN article right now. Too bad that the View Transform section uses functions that I don't have. There wasn't any helper function in OGL, but functions to deal with the fixedfunction pipeline constructs which had matrix stacks, projection matrices, transforms, etc. Since those constructs are removed in modern OGL, I have to implement them myself.
There is GLM which is a C++ library that do has some helper functions and data types that mirror GLSL types for example. I'm using Java though.
Anyway, I should point out that I had separate rotations for each axis working before, and those did stack. It was an awful amount of multiplying though (3 separate matrices for rotations, one for translation and the perspective). I was looking for a more straightforward way.
.
I thought that the general rotation matrix with 1 vector and 1 angle would work but it didn't quite worked as I imagined.
In the code I set up three unit vectors, (1,0,0), (0,1,0), (0,0,1). A 3 floats for each angle and an offset (say, +5 degrees for each update). Camera looking down Z axis by default. When you press a key that rotates, say, along Z , I send the angle (currentAngle = currentAngle + offset) and the Z unit vector.
That works, it rotates the world along the Z axis by currentAngle (in radians). But if I rotate again, along Y for example, the rotation will work as if the camera was looking down the Z axis again (which it isnt, because I rotated it before). So each rotation works separately.
Then I thought, well yeah because the unit vectors, which represent the axis of rotations, never changed. So I set it up so after a rotation, it rotates each vector by the same matrix and then normalizes the result. That didn't worked either, it still rotates as if the camera is always looking down the Z axis, but in awkward ways.
Even if it didn't worked, I couldn't recognize where I was doing my world transform and view transform. Now I think that I'm not doing any world transform since I did not need it for what I was doing. It renders the vertices as they are (it is supposed to be the terrain so (0,0) position of the terrain is (0,0) of the world), and then trying to transform them to camera space.
Edited by TheChubuShare this post
Link to post
Share on other sites