• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL OpenGL Camera

This topic is 1267 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

This is my first post (which is sad because I've been a member for years) Hello, world!

 

I've got to say, I'm eager to learn from what is probably a very obvious mistake I'm making. This is my code for a free-flying camera. I don't have any movement code yet, so the camera just rotates around the origin. As I move the camera, it's almost as if the axis is slowly drifting, until I'm no longer rotating on the right axes!

glm::float_t scale = -500.0;
m_LookLR += (glm::float_t)analogEvent.x / scale;
m_LookUD += (glm::float_t)analogEvent.y / scale;

m_LookUD = glm::clamp<glm::float_t>(m_LookUD, -glm::half_pi<glm::float_t>(), glm::half_pi<glm::float_t>());

const glm::quat rotLR(0, glm::sin(m_LookLR / 2.0), 0, glm::cos(m_LookLR / 2.0));
const glm::quat rotUD(0, 0, glm::sin(m_LookUD / 2.0), glm::cos(m_LookUD / 2.0));
oglContext->rotViewMatrix = glm::mat4_cast(rotLR * rotUD);

From here, "rotViewMatrix" is multiplied against the translation view matrix and the projection matrix. Model matrix is multiplied in the shader.

 

I've seen other posts where some people use Euler Angles and others use Quaternions. I'm completely open to suggestion. Ease of use doesn't really bother me, but if one is a couple of floats and the other takes 2K of memory I'd go with the smaller footprint.

 

Regards,

ComradeSlice

 

EDIT: editor won't let me add spacing before/after the code block. Sorry for scrunched up post...

Edited by ComradeSlice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

I'm not sure what you mean by the axis drifting, but there is something that looks off in your code.

looking at the quaternion reference form glm, it looks like you are getting the parameter order wrong in the quat constructor. It expects w first, you are passing it in last.

 

Also, usually the forward vector for the camera goes along the z axis. For your up down rotation, it looks like you are rotating around the z axis. This will result in the camera rolling instead of pitching. Try switching the rotUP to rotate around the x axis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you mean by the axis drifting, but there is something that looks off in your code.

looking at the quaternion reference form glm, it looks like you are getting the parameter order wrong in the quat constructor. It expects w first, you are passing it in last.

 

Also, usually the forward vector for the camera goes along the z axis. For your up down rotation, it looks like you are rotating around the z axis. This will result in the camera rolling instead of pitching. Try switching the rotUP to rotate around the x axis.

 

Now that makes a lot more sense. I changed the camera code accordingly:

const glm::quat rotLR(glm::cos(m_LookLR / 2.0), 0, glm::sin(m_LookLR / 2.0), 0);
const glm::quat rotUD(glm::cos(m_LookUD / 2.0), glm::sin(m_LookUD / 2.0), 0, 0);

I was still having issues with the camera rolling after this, but then I remembered reading about order of operations in glm. I changed the order that both quaternions were being multiplied:

//oglContext->rotViewMatrix = glm::mat4_cast(rotLR*rotUD);
oglContext->rotViewMatrix = glm::mat4_cast(rotUD*rotLR);

Voilà! It works perfectly now. Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a little surprised to see that you take issue with OpenGL because of legacy support and the API in general. I was reading what you wrote in a thread with someone asking for beginner's advice. Do you think OpenGL is too old to really take full advantage of the graphics resources today's hardware has to offer? I'm sticking with OGL for cross-platform support, but if there were significant potential performance gains from using DX11, I would make a Windows wrapper to support both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OpenGL is still a good option. I just recommended DirectX because of an experience I had learning OpenGL. I had been using OpenGL for a few years now. I then learned DirectX11 and by using DirectX I learned that the way I have been using OpenGL was outdated. A few examples of features are constant buffers, samplers, and seperate shader objects. DirectX forced me to use these features since it didn't allow me to do them the old way. OpenGL let me stay in the past, that is all I was saying there.

 

I don't think OpenGL is bad, what you learn using OpenGL will carry over to DirectX, you just need to learn a few API differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you had to do was create a forward compatible context, HappyCoder.

Some pros and cons:

DX:

* object-oriented

* locked-in (windows, xbox, ...)

* has wonderful tools to help you find problems

* microsoft has reference tools that forces implementations to conform

 

GL:

* C API, with a zillion bindings (meaning you can use absolutely any language you so desire, eg. Python, Java)

* multi-platform

* has had really bad tools and support for a long long time, but that's probably changing now with vogl(?) and co.

* hasn't had reference implementations, but that may change (there's a reference shader compiler now at least)

* has a baggage train from dinosaur era (which you can disable with forward-compatibility)

 

With that said, I still prefer OpenGL. Modern OpenGL has no significant problems. I don't know which is better for beginners. I'm just going to assume DirectX, but that's only if beginners actually use debugging tools.....

Edited by Kaptein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you had to do was create a forward compatible context, HappyCoder.
Some pros and cons:
DX:
* object-oriented
* locked-in (windows, xbox, ...)
* has wonderful tools to help you find problems
* microsoft has reference tools that forces implementations to conform
 
GL:
* C API, with a zillion bindings (meaning you can use absolutely any language you so desire, eg. Python, Java)
* multi-platform
* has had really bad tools and support for a long long time, but that's probably changing now with vogl(?) and co.
* hasn't had reference implementations, but that may change (there's a reference shader compiler now at least)
* has a baggage train from dinosaur era (which you can disable with forward-compatibility)
 
With that said, I still prefer OpenGL. Modern OpenGL has no significant problems. I don't know which is better for beginners. I'm just going to assume DirectX, but that's only if beginners actually use debugging tools.....


I have starting doing OpenGL dev only about 6+ months ago and so far it has been OK. Compared to DirectX OpenGL seems easier.

I believe the biggest problem that I face as a new Dev with OpenGL is the huge change OpenGL had a few years ago with modernization (OpenGL 3+)

That left a huge gap between all of the information out there regarding "old" OpenGL and new; in many ways it looks like a whole new language compared to the old stuff.

Once you get the hang of it everything starts getting easier; it seems to me due to OpenGL being the true cross-platform low level graphics API that DirectX's days are numbered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have starting doing OpenGL dev only about 6+ months ago and so far it has been OK. Compared to DirectX OpenGL seems easier.

I believe the biggest problem that I face as a new Dev with OpenGL is the huge change OpenGL had a few years ago with modernization (OpenGL 3+)

That left a huge gap between all of the information out there regarding "old" OpenGL and new; in many ways it looks like a whole new language compared to the old stuff.

Once you get the hang of it everything starts getting easier; it seems to me due to OpenGL being the true cross-platform low level graphics API that DirectX's days are numbered.

 

 

I think I'm almost at the point where I can say I've got the hang of it. It used to drive me crazy how most of the material out there is for legacy OpenGL. I was only able to pave my way in modern OpenGL after finding a very small number of wonderful modern tutorials. I completely agree that OpenGL 3+ looks like a completely different API, it being Object Oriented vs the ugly State Machine in earlier standards.

 

I appreciate all the opinions. I now feel justified in using OpenGL on Windows, and not just using it lazily to make a half-ass port. HappyCoder, thanks for help with the camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Advertisement
  • Popular Now

  • Similar Content

    • By LifeArtist
      Good Evening,
      I want to make a 2D game which involves displaying some debug information. Especially for collision, enemy sights and so on ...
      First of I was thinking about all those shapes which I need will need for debugging purposes: circles, rectangles, lines, polygons.
      I am really stucked right now because of the fundamental question:
      Where do I store my vertices positions for each line (object)? Currently I am not using a model matrix because I am using orthographic projection and set the final position within the VBO. That means that if I add a new line I would have to expand the "points" array and re-upload (recall glBufferData) it every time. The other method would be to use a model matrix and a fixed vbo for a line but it would be also messy to exactly create a line from (0,0) to (100,20) calculating the rotation and scale to make it fit.
      If I proceed with option 1 "updating the array each frame" I was thinking of having 4 draw calls every frame for the lines vao, polygons vao and so on. 
      In addition to that I am planning to use some sort of ECS based architecture. So the other question would be:
      Should I treat those debug objects as entities/components?
      For me it would make sense to treat them as entities but that's creates a new issue with the previous array approach because it would have for example a transform and render component. A special render component for debug objects (no texture etc) ... For me the transform component is also just a matrix but how would I then define a line?
      Treating them as components would'nt be a good idea in my eyes because then I would always need an entity. Well entity is just an id !? So maybe its a component?
      Regards,
      LifeArtist
    • By QQemka
      Hello. I am coding a small thingy in my spare time. All i want to achieve is to load a heightmap (as the lowest possible walking terrain), some static meshes (elements of the environment) and a dynamic character (meaning i can move, collide with heightmap/static meshes and hold a varying item in a hand ). Got a bunch of questions, or rather problems i can't find solution to myself. Nearly all are deal with graphics/gpu, not the coding part. My c++ is on high enough level.
      Let's go:
      Heightmap - i obviously want it to be textured, size is hardcoded to 256x256 squares. I can't have one huge texture stretched over entire terrain cause every pixel would be enormous. Thats why i decided to use 2 specified textures. First will be a tileset consisting of 16 square tiles (u v range from 0 to 0.25 for first tile and so on) and second a 256x256 buffer with 0-15 value representing index of the tile from tileset for every heigtmap square. Problem is, how do i blend the edges nicely and make some computationally cheap changes so its not obvious there are only 16 tiles? Is it possible to generate such terrain with some existing program?
      Collisions - i want to use bounding sphere and aabb. But should i store them for a model or entity instance? Meaning i have 20 same trees spawned using the same tree model, but every entity got its own transformation (position, scale etc). Storing collision component per instance grats faster access + is precalculated and transformed (takes additional memory, but who cares?), so i stick with this, right? What should i do if object is dynamically rotated? The aabb is no longer aligned and calculating per vertex min/max everytime object rotates/scales is pretty expensive, right?
      Drawing aabb - problem similar to above (storing aabb data per instance or model). This time in my opinion per model is enough since every instance also does not have own vertex buffer but uses the shared one (so 20 trees share reference to one tree model). So rendering aabb is about taking the model's aabb, transforming with instance matrix and voila. What about aabb vertex buffer (this is more of a cosmetic question, just curious, bumped onto it in time of writing this). Is it better to make it as 8 points and index buffer (12 lines), or only 2 vertices with min/max x/y/z and having the shaders dynamically generate 6 other vertices and draw the box? Or maybe there should be just ONE 1x1x1 cube box template moved/scaled per entity?
      What if one model got a diffuse texture and a normal map, and other has only diffuse? Should i pass some bool flag to shader with that info, or just assume that my game supports only diffuse maps without fancy stuff?
      There were several more but i forgot/solved them at time of writing
      Thanks in advance
    • By RenanRR
      Hi All,
      I'm reading the tutorials from learnOpengl site (nice site) and I'm having a question on the camera (https://learnopengl.com/Getting-started/Camera).
      I always saw the camera being manipulated with the lookat, but in tutorial I saw the camera being changed through the MVP arrays, which do not seem to be camera, but rather the scene that changes:
      Vertex Shader:
      #version 330 core layout (location = 0) in vec3 aPos; layout (location = 1) in vec2 aTexCoord; out vec2 TexCoord; uniform mat4 model; uniform mat4 view; uniform mat4 projection; void main() { gl_Position = projection * view * model * vec4(aPos, 1.0f); TexCoord = vec2(aTexCoord.x, aTexCoord.y); } then, the matrix manipulated:
      ..... glm::mat4 projection = glm::perspective(glm::radians(fov), (float)SCR_WIDTH / (float)SCR_HEIGHT, 0.1f, 100.0f); ourShader.setMat4("projection", projection); .... glm::mat4 view = glm::lookAt(cameraPos, cameraPos + cameraFront, cameraUp); ourShader.setMat4("view", view); .... model = glm::rotate(model, glm::radians(angle), glm::vec3(1.0f, 0.3f, 0.5f)); ourShader.setMat4("model", model);  
      So, some doubts:
      - Why use it like that?
      - Is it okay to manipulate the camera that way?
      -in this way, are not the vertex's positions that changes instead of the camera?
      - I need to pass MVP to all shaders of object in my scenes ?
       
      What it seems, is that the camera stands still and the scenery that changes...
      it's right?
       
       
      Thank you
       
    • By dpadam450
      Sampling a floating point texture where the alpha channel holds 4-bytes of packed data into the float. I don't know how to cast the raw memory to treat it as an integer so I can perform bit-shifting operations.

      int rgbValue = int(textureSample.w);//4 bytes of data packed as color
      // algorithm might not be correct and endianness might need switching.
      vec3 extractedData = vec3(  rgbValue & 0xFF000000,  (rgbValue << 8) & 0xFF000000, (rgbValue << 16) & 0xFF000000);
      extractedData /= 255.0f;
    • By Devashish Khandelwal
      While writing a simple renderer using OpenGL, I faced an issue with the glGetUniformLocation function. For some reason, the location is coming to be -1.
      Anyone has any idea .. what should I do?
  • Advertisement