Sign in to follow this  

DX11 Camera Rotation in DX11

Recommended Posts

Hi People :>


So I recently got started with DX11 and graphics programming in general. I followed tutorials and a book on how to understand and set up the basic stuff. At this point I've managed putting a colored cube in a grey window. I also implemented my own input system (mouse and keyboard) based on window messages.

Now I have come to implementing camera controls, and when I tried to rotate it I came across a problem. I have made it so that when I hold down the right mousebutton I enable rotating, and moving the mouse then rotates the camera based on how far the mouse-cursor has traveled since the last frame (pixels). Moving the mouse in either the horizontal or vertical direction alone creates no problem, but as soon as I do a circle-movement with the mouse, the camera starts spinning. So for a reason I don't know I get kind of a "rolling" of the camera in that situation. Does anyone have an idea why this is happening ?


The viewmatrix is being bult like this:

View = XMMatrixLookAtLH( EyePos, Focus, UpDir );

Update function of the camera, is being called every frame.

void Camera::Update()
	if( fwd )

	if( back )

	if( left )

	if( right )

	if( rotate )
		View *= RotationX;
		View *= RotationY;

	cb.mView = XMMatrixTranspose( View );
	m_pImmediateContext->UpdateSubresource( pConstantBuffer, 0, NULL, &cb, 0, 0 );

function that does the rotating, GetMouseDelta() returns how far the mouse has traveled since the last frame

void Camera::Rotate()
	RotationX = XMMatrixRotationAxis( XMVectorSet( 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f ), -(float)pInput->GetMouseDelta().y*0.001f );
	RotationY = XMMatrixRotationAxis( XMVectorSet( 0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f ), -(float)pInput->GetMouseDelta().x*0.001f );
Edited by moodiez

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your problem is probably caused by the order of transformations. First of, do you want to yield in a look-around rotation, in an orbiting around the focused object, or else (least probable) a rotation around the global origin? When rotation is applied, should it be done w.r.t. to some local or some global axes (I mean is it really yaw/pitch or do you want to spin around the global up direction regardless of any pitch)?


You further have to clarify whether you use row or column vectors. AFAIK the XMMatrixLookAtLH returns a row vector matrix. Then you multiply View with the incremental rotations you do it in an order that seems me odd. Then you're applying a XMMatrixTranspose onto the view matrix before transporting it to the shader script. I'm not familiar with D3D so my question is w.r.t. the transpose: Is this needed for the CBuffer and/or the shader script, or what is the reason for this?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi haegarr.

To answer your questions, I want to rotate the camera around its local axes, not around any other object or global axes. I want to create a "camera" which I can rotate around itself and later on impement to manipulate its position in world space.

The way I rotate the view at the moment works fine, as long as I only rotate it around ONE axis.


The transposing is needed to update the data-structure thats being passed ot the shader (world,view,projection matrices)


Thanks in advance for further help :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must be aware that rotating around the x axis followed by rotating around the y axis is different from rotating around the y axis followed by rotating around the x axis. Hence, if you push the mouse 10 units to the right and then 10 unit upwards, the result will differ from pushing the mouse 10 units upwards and then 10 units to the right. If you move the mouse more or less diagonally and do so with relatively high speed, the result will differ from a movement in the same direction but with significantly lower speed. This is because in the first case you do e.g.

    Ry(45°) * Rx(45°)

while in the latter case you do (assuming 1/3 of speed with 3 samples in time)

    Ry(15°) * Rx(15°) * Ry(15°) * Rx(15°) * Ry(15°) * Rx(15°)


Notice that the above shows what is called incremental rotation, especially if the angles get really small. The smaller the angles the more independent the rotation. However, you cannot process with arbitrarily high speed, and you will not enforce the user to move the mouse really slowly.

When you look at your current solution you'll see that the axis of rotation is orthogonal to the direction of mouse movement: horizontal movement = upwards directed axis of rotation; vertical movement = sidewards directed axis of rotation. Generalizing this means that however the mouse is moved, the axis of rotation is the perpDot of the movement direction. It is perhaps worth a try (I'm not 100% sure of the success, though).

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
    • Total Posts
  • Similar Content

    • By Baemz
      I've been working on some culling-techniques for a project. We've built our own engine so pretty much everything is built from scratch. I've set up a frustum with the following code, assuming that the FOV is 90 degrees.
      float angle = CU::ToRadians(45.f); Plane<float> nearPlane(Vector3<float>(0, 0, aNear), Vector3<float>(0, 0, -1)); Plane<float> farPlane(Vector3<float>(0, 0, aFar), Vector3<float>(0, 0, 1)); Plane<float> right(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(angle, 0, -angle)); Plane<float> left(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(-angle, 0, -angle)); Plane<float> up(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(0, angle, -angle)); Plane<float> down(Vector3<float>(0, 0, 0), Vector3<float>(0, -angle, -angle)); myVolume.AddPlane(nearPlane); myVolume.AddPlane(farPlane); myVolume.AddPlane(right); myVolume.AddPlane(left); myVolume.AddPlane(up); myVolume.AddPlane(down); When checking the intersections I am using a BoundingSphere of my models, which is calculated by taking the average position of all vertices and then choosing the furthest distance to a vertex for radius. The actual intersection test looks like this, where the "myFrustum90" is the actual frustum described above.
      The orientationInverse is the viewMatrix in this case.
      bool CFrustum::Intersects(const SFrustumCollider& aCollider) { CU::Vector4<float> position = CU::Vector4<float>(aCollider.myCenter.x, aCollider.myCenter.y, aCollider.myCenter.z, 1.f) * myOrientationInverse; return myFrustum90.Inside({ position.x, position.y, position.z }, aCollider.myRadius); } The Inside() function looks like this.
      template <typename T> bool PlaneVolume<T>::Inside(Vector3<T> aPosition, T aRadius) const { for (unsigned short i = 0; i < myPlaneList.size(); ++i) { if (myPlaneList[i].ClassifySpherePlane(aPosition, aRadius) > 0) { return false; } } return true; } And this is the ClassifySpherePlane() function. (The plane is defined as a Vector4 called myABCD, where ABC is the normal)
      template <typename T> inline int Plane<T>::ClassifySpherePlane(Vector3<T> aSpherePosition, float aSphereRadius) const { float distance = (aSpherePosition.Dot(myNormal)) - myABCD.w; // completely on the front side if (distance >= aSphereRadius) { return 1; } // completely on the backside (aka "inside") if (distance <= -aSphereRadius) { return -1; } //sphere intersects the plane return 0; }  
      Please bare in mind that this code is not optimized nor well-written by any means. I am just looking to get it working.
      The result of this culling is that the models seem to be culled a bit "too early", so that the culling is visible and the models pops away.
      How do I get the culling to work properly?
      I have tried different techniques but haven't gotten any of them to work.
      If you need more code or explanations feel free to ask for it.

    • By evelyn4you
      i have read very much about the binding of a constantbuffer to a shader but something is still unclear to me.
      e.g. when performing :   vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer,  slot )
       is the buffer bound
      a.  to the VertexShaderStage
      b. to the VertexShader that is currently set as the active VertexShader
      Is it possible to bind a constantBuffer to a VertexShader e.g. VS_A and keep this binding even after the active VertexShader has changed ?
      I mean i want to bind constantbuffer_A  to VS_A, an Constantbuffer_B to VS_B  and  only use updateSubresource without using setConstantBuffer command every time.

      Look at this example:
      SetVertexShader ( VS_A )
      vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer_A,  slot_A )
      perform drawcall       ( buffer_A is used )

      SetVertexShader ( VS_B )
      vertexshader.setConstantbuffer ( buffer_B,  slot_A )
      perform drawcall   ( buffer_B is used )
      SetVertexShader ( VS_A )
      perform drawcall   (now which buffer is used ??? )
      I ask this question because i have made a custom render engine an want to optimize to
      the minimum  updateSubresource, and setConstantbuffer  calls
    • By noodleBowl
      I got a quick question about buffers when it comes to DirectX 11. If I bind a buffer using a command like:
      IASetVertexBuffers IASetIndexBuffer VSSetConstantBuffers PSSetConstantBuffers  and then later on I update that bound buffer's data using commands like Map/Unmap or any of the other update commands.
      Do I need to rebind the buffer again in order for my update to take effect? If I dont rebind is that really bad as in I get a performance hit? My thought process behind this is that if the buffer is already bound why do I need to rebind it? I'm using that same buffer it is just different data
    • By Rockmover
      I am really stuck with something that should be very simple in DirectX 11. 
      1. I can draw lines using a PC (position, colored) vertices and a simple shader just fine.
      2. I can draw 3D triangles using PCN (position, colored, normal) vertices just fine (even transparency and SpecularBlinnPhong shaders).
      However, if I'm using my 3D shader, and I want to draw my PC lines in the same scene how can I do that?
      If I change my lines to PCN and pass them to the 3D shader with my triangles, then the lighting screws them all up.  I only want the lighting for the 3D triangles, but no SpecularBlinnPhong/Lighting for the lines (just PC). 
      I am sure this is because if I change the lines to PNC there is not really a correct "normal" for the lines.  
      I assume I somehow need to draw the 3D triangles using one shader, and then "switch" to another shader and draw the lines?  But I have no clue how to use two different shaders in the same scene.  And then are the lines just drawn on top of the triangles, or vice versa (maybe draw order dependent)?  
      I must be missing something really basic, so if anyone can just point me in the right direction (or link to an example showing the implementation of multiple shaders) that would be REALLY appreciated.
      I'm also more than happy to post my simple test code if that helps as well!
    • By Reitano
      I am writing a linear allocator of per-frame constants using the DirectX 11.1 API. My plan is to replace the traditional constant allocation strategy, where most of the work is done by the driver behind my back, with a manual one inspired by the DirectX 12 and Vulkan APIs.
      In brief, the allocator maintains a list of 64K pages, each page owns a constant buffer managed as a ring buffer. Each page has a history of the N previous frames. At the beginning of a new frame, the allocator retires the frames that have been processed by the GPU and frees up the corresponding space in each page. I use DirectX 11 queries for detecting when a frame is complete and the ID3D11DeviceContext1::VS/PSSetConstantBuffers1 methods for binding constant buffers with an offset.
      The new allocator appears to be working but I am not 100% confident it is actually correct. In particular:
      1) it relies on queries which I am not too familiar with. Are they 100% reliable ?
      2) it maps/unmaps the constant buffer of each page at the beginning of a new frame and then writes the mapped memory as the frame is built. In pseudo code:
 = device.Map(page.buffer)
          Alloc(size, initData)
              memcpy( + page.start, initData, size)
          Alloc(size, initData)
              memcpy( + page.start, initData, size)
      (Note: calling Unmap at the end of a frame prevents binding the mapped constant buffers and triggers an error in the debug layer)
      Is this valid ? 
      3) I don't fully understand how many frames I should keep in the history. My intuition says it should be equal to the maximum latency reported by IDXGIDevice1::GetMaximumFrameLatency, which is 3 on my machine. But, this value works fine in an unit test while on a more complex demo I need to manually set it to 5, otherwise the allocator starts overwriting previous frames that have not completed yet. Shouldn't the swap chain Present method block the CPU in this case ?
      4) Should I expect this approach to be more efficient than the one managed by the driver ? I don't have meaningful profile data yet.
      Is anybody familiar with the approach described above and can answer my questions and discuss the pros and cons of this technique based on his experience ? 
      For reference, I've uploaded the (WIP) allocator code at  Feel free to adapt it in your engine and please let me know if you spot any mistakes
      Stefano Lanza
  • Popular Now