Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Hi guys, when I do picking followed by ray-plane intersection the results are all wrong. I am pretty sure my ray-plane intersection is correct so I'll just show the picking part. Please take a look:


// get projection_matrix
DirectX::XMFLOAT4X4 mat;
DirectX::XMStoreFloat4x4(&mat, projection_matrix);

float2 v;
v.x = (((2.0f * (float)mouse_x) / (float)screen_width) - 1.0f) / mat._11;
v.y = -(((2.0f * (float)mouse_y) / (float)screen_height) - 1.0f) / mat._22;

// get inverse of view_matrix
DirectX::XMMATRIX inv_view = DirectX::XMMatrixInverse(nullptr, view_matrix);
DirectX::XMStoreFloat4x4(&mat, inv_view);

// create ray origin (camera position)
float3 ray_origin;
ray_origin.x = mat._41;
ray_origin.y = mat._42;
ray_origin.z = mat._43;

// create ray direction
float3 ray_dir;
ray_dir.x  = v.x * mat._11 + v.y * mat._21 + mat._31;
ray_dir.y  = v.x * mat._12 + v.y * mat._22 + mat._32;
ray_dir.z  = v.x * mat._13 + v.y * mat._23 + mat._33;


That should give me a ray origin and direction in world space but when I do the ray-plane intersection the results are all wrong.

If I click on the bottom half of the screen ray_dir.z becomes negative (more so as I click lower). I don't understand how that can be, shouldn't it always be pointing down the z-axis ?

I had this working in the past but I can't find my old code :(

Please help. Thank you.

Edited by Endemoniada
Typo in code.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

was this a typo? (using an "m" matrix, i don't see it anywhere else in that code, i'm sure you meant "mat")

float3 ray_origin;
ray_origin.x = m._41;
ray_origin.y = m._42;
ray_origin.z = m._43;

Also it's not weird that ray_dir.z would be negative the further down on the screen you click, if your camera is facing down. ray_dir and ray_origin should be in world coordinates, so the direction that ray points depends on the direction your camera is facing (as well as where on the screen you click)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi iedoc, yes, that was a typo, I fixed it.


My camera is pointing down (isometric), like in Diablo. The ray from the camera position (eye) to the camera look at point is always positive z, so it's hard for me to see how the picking ray direction can have a negative z. In any case, I still can't figure out what I'm doing wrong. When I click parts of the flat ground that are in positive x and positive z they come up as negative and are totally inaccurate.


For example, when I click the ground at world coordinates (0, 0, 0) it shows ~ (-70, 0, -70) and when I click at (4, 0, 0) it shows ~ (-58, 0, -80), the values are way off, the z shouldn't change at all, and the x should only change by 4.


I'll keep trying.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

what shows (-70, 0, -70)? the ray origin? or the ray direction? If neither, make sure your getting a ray you would expect to get before anything else. is the ray origin the position of the camera correct? is the ray direction somewhat in the direction your camera is facing?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, I'm just getting back to this and still can't figure out what's wrong. I'll post the complete code and results:


//	view matrix

float3 camera_target = { 0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f };

DirectX::XMVECTOR look = DirectX::XMVectorSet(camera_target.x, camera_target.y, camera_target.z, 0.0f);
DirectX::XMVECTOR eye = DirectX::XMVectorSet(camera_target.x, camera_target.y + 64.0f, camera_target.z - 64.0f, 0.0f);
DirectX::XMVECTOR up = DirectX::XMVectorSet(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f);

DirectX::XMMATRIX view_matrix = DirectX::XMMatrixLookAtLH(eye, look, up);

//	projection matrix (orthographic with same aspect as screen 16:9)

DirectX::XMMATRIX projection_matrix = DirectX::XMMatrixOrthographicLH(160.0f, 90.0f, 8.0f, 128.0f);

//	mouse/screen coordinates

float screen_width = 1920;
float screen_height = 1080;

float mouse_x = params[0];
float mouse_y = params[1];

//	picking part

DirectX::XMFLOAT4X4 mat;
DirectX::XMStoreFloat4x4(&mat, projection_matrix);

float point_x = ((2.0f * mouse_x) / screen_width) - 1.0f;
float point_y = -(((2.0f * mouse_y) / screen_height) - 1.0f);

point_x = point_x / mat._11;
point_y = point_y / mat._22;

DirectX::XMMATRIX inv_view = DirectX::XMMatrixInverse(nullptr, view_matrix);
DirectX::XMStoreFloat4x4(&mat, inv_view);

float3 ray_origin = { mat._41, mat._42, mat._43 };

float3 ray_dir;
ray_dir.x = (point_x * mat._11) + (point_y * mat._21) + mat._31;
ray_dir.y = (point_x * mat._12) + (point_y * mat._22) + mat._32;
ray_dir.z = (point_x * mat._13) + (point_y * mat._23) + mat._33;

//	normalize ray_dir (not sure if necessary)


The camera is simply above and behind the world origin, looking down and forward at it, like a basic top-down view. The screen resolution (same as render target) is 1920 x 1080.

Here are the results:

(mouse coords in screen space) : (ray direction)

(960, 540) : (0.0, -0.707, 0.707)
(970, 540) : (0.640, -0.543, 0.543)
(1000, 540) : (0.958, -0.203, 0.203)

The first set is the centre of the screen and seems fine. The second set is just 10 pixels over to the right, but look at the ray_dir.x. Look at the third set, the mouse is just 40 pixels over to the right and the ray is pretty much pointing down the x-axis.

I feel like I'm missing a step somewhere. Please help. Thank you.




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens if you try this?

DirectX::XMStoreFloat4x4(&mat, XMMatrixTranspose(projection_matrix));
DirectX::XMStoreFloat4x4(&mat, XMMatrixTranspose(inv_view));

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

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By chiffre
      In general my questions pertain to the differences between floating- and fixed-point data. Additionally I would like to understand when it can be advantageous to prefer fixed-point representation over floating-point representation in the context of vertex data and how the hardware deals with the different data-types. I believe I should be able to reduce the amount of data (bytes) necessary per vertex by choosing the most opportune representations for my vertex attributes. Thanks ahead of time if you, the reader, are considering the effort of reading this and helping me.
      I found an old topic that shows this is possible in principal, but I am not sure I understand what the pitfalls are when using fixed-point representation and whether there are any hardware-based performance advantages/disadvantages.
      (TLDR at bottom)
      The Actual Post:
      To my understanding HLSL/D3D11 offers not just the traditional floating point model in half-,single-, and double-precision, but also the fixed-point model in form of signed/unsigned normalized integers in 8-,10-,16-,24-, and 32-bit variants. Both models offer a finite sequence of "grid-points". The obvious difference between the two models is that the fixed-point model offers a constant spacing between values in the normalized range of [0,1] or [-1,1], while the floating point model allows for smaller "deltas" as you get closer to 0, and larger "deltas" the further you are away from 0.
      To add some context, let me define a struct as an example:
      struct VertexData { float[3] position; //3x32-bits float[2] texCoord; //2x32-bits float[3] normals; //3x32-bits } //Total of 32 bytes Every vertex gets a position, a coordinate on my texture, and a normal to do some light calculations. In this case we have 8x32=256bits per vertex. Since the texture coordinates lie in the interval [0,1] and the normal vector components are in the interval [-1,1] it would seem useful to use normalized representation as suggested in the topic linked at the top of the post. The texture coordinates might as well be represented in a fixed-point model, because it seems most useful to be able to sample the texture in a uniform manner, as the pixels don't get any "denser" as we get closer to 0. In other words the "delta" does not need to become any smaller as the texture coordinates approach (0,0). A similar argument can be made for the normal-vector, as a normal vector should be normalized anyway, and we want as many points as possible on the sphere around (0,0,0) with a radius of 1, and we don't care about precision around the origin. Even if we have large textures such as 4k by 4k (or the maximum allowed by D3D11, 16k by 16k) we only need as many grid-points on one axis, as there are pixels on one axis. An unsigned normalized 14 bit integer would be ideal, but because it is both unsupported and impractical, we will stick to an unsigned normalized 16 bit integer. The same type should take care of the normal vector coordinates, and might even be a bit overkill.
      struct VertexData { float[3] position; //3x32-bits uint16_t[2] texCoord; //2x16bits uint16_t[3] normals; //3x16bits } //Total of 22 bytes Seems like a good start, and we might even be able to take it further, but before we pursue that path, here is my first question: can the GPU even work with the data in this format, or is all I have accomplished minimizing CPU-side RAM usage? Does the GPU have to convert the texture coordinates back to a floating-point model when I hand them over to the sampler in my pixel shader? I have looked up the data types for HLSL and I am not sure I even comprehend how to declare the vertex input type in HLSL. Would the following work?
      struct VertexInputType { float3 pos; //this one is obvious unorm half2 tex; //half corresponds to a 16-bit float, so I assume this is wrong, but this the only 16-bit type I found on the linked MSDN site snorm half3 normal; //same as above } I assume this is possible somehow, as I have found input element formats such as: DXGI_FORMAT_R16G16B16A16_SNORM and DXGI_FORMAT_R16G16B16A16_UNORM (also available with a different number of components, as well as different component lengths). I might have to avoid 3-component vectors because there is no 3-component 16-bit input element format, but that is the least of my worries. The next question would be: what happens with my normals if I try to do lighting calculations with them in such a normalized-fixed-point format? Is there no issue as long as I take care not to mix floating- and fixed-point data? Or would that work as well? In general this gives rise to the question: how does the GPU handle fixed-point arithmetic? Is it the same as integer-arithmetic, and/or is it faster/slower than floating-point arithmetic?
      Assuming that we still have a valid and useful VertexData format, how far could I take this while remaining on the sensible side of what could be called optimization? Theoretically I could use the an input element format such as DXGI_FORMAT_R10G10B10A2_UNORM to pack my normal coordinates into a 10-bit fixed-point format, and my verticies (in object space) might even be representable in a 16-bit unsigned normalized fixed-point format. That way I could end up with something like the following struct:
      struct VertexData { uint16_t[3] pos; //3x16bits uint16_t[2] texCoord; //2x16bits uint32_t packedNormals; //10+10+10+2bits } //Total of 14 bytes Could I use a vertex structure like this without too much performance-loss on the GPU-side? If the GPU has to execute some sort of unpacking algorithm in the background I might as well let it be. In the end I have a functioning deferred renderer, but I would like to reduce the memory footprint of the huge amount of vertecies involved in rendering my landscape. 
      TLDR: I have a lot of vertices that I need to render and I want to reduce the RAM-usage without introducing crazy compression/decompression algorithms to the CPU or GPU. I am hoping to find a solution by involving fixed-point data-types, but I am not exactly sure how how that would work.
    • By cozzie
      Hi all,
      I was wondering it it matters in which order you draw 2D and 3D items, looking at the BeginDraw/EndDraw calls on a D2D rendertarget.
      The order in which you do the actual draw calls is clear, 3D first then 2D, means the 2D (DrawText in this case) is in front of the 3D scene.
      The question is mainly about when to call the BeginDraw and EndDraw.
      Note that I'm drawing D2D stuff through a DXGI surface linked to the 3D RT.
      Option 1:
      A - Begin frame, clear D3D RT
      B - Draw 3D
      C - BeginDraw D2D RT
      D - Draw 2D
      E - EndDraw D2D RT
      F - Present
      Option 2:
      A - Begin frame, clear D3D RT + BeginDraw D2D RT
      B - Draw 3D
      C - Draw 2D
      D - EndDraw D2D RT
      E- Present
      Would there be a difference (performance/issue?) in using option 2? (versus 1)
      Any input is appreciated.
    • By Sebastian Werema
      Do you know any papers that cover custom data structures like lists or binary trees implemented in hlsl without CUDA that work perfectly fine no matter how many threads try to use them at any given time?
    • By cozzie
      Hi all,
      Last week I noticed that when I run my test application(s) in Renderdoc, it crashes when it enable my code that uses D2D/DirectWrite. In Visual Studio no issues occur (debug or release), but when I run the same executable in Renderdoc, it crashes somehow (assert of D2D rendertarget or without any information). Before I spend hours on debugging/ figuring it out, does someone have experience with this symptom and/or know if Renderdoc has known issues with D2D? (if so, that would be bad news for debugging my application in the future );
      I can also post some more information on what happens, code and which code commented out, eliminates the problems (when running in RenderDoc).
      Any input is appreciated.
    • By lonewolff
      Hi Guys,
      I understand how to create input layouts etc... But I am wondering is it at all possible to derive an input layout from a shader and create the input layout directly from this? (Rather than manually specifying the input layout format?)
      Thanks in advance :)
  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!