I'm having trouble thinking of how to convert to the 3D instead of 2D, e.g.
x1=bla
y2=bla
x1=0;
--pak-9's rotation stuff
should i use something like:
x1=x(0);
y1=y(0);
z1=z(0);
??? a little help would be greatly appreciated
2d -> 3d conversion
38 posts
well, i'd be pleased if i could help! But that would unfortunately provide that i could understand what your problem is anyway...
er... superscope nor triangle.ape nor texer2 doesn`t support 3D drawing, you HAVE to convert 3D to 2D
perhaps he tries to convert from 4D to 3D, then want's to apply some code. And after that he wants to convert to 2D first. Just an assumption, cause i have no inkling of what he actually wants.
2d to 3d? 2d stays flat no matter how much more dimensions you add because the original isn't affected by adding dimensions alone.
In other words:
Even if you do have a 3D monitor (which I HIGHLY doubt) it still would be flat.
In other words:
Even if you do have a 3D monitor (which I HIGHLY doubt) it still would be flat.
It could be that i now got what he asked for! If you convert 3D to 2D you assign the z-coordinates as a zoom factor to your 2D image (you know, near objects are big and vice versa...). And now you want to get back 3D coordinates from the 2D image, right? Wel if so i have to tell you that this isn't possible. As soon as you convert 3D into 2D you lose all perspective information. You recognize the following drawing as a cube, but AVS only recognizes three connected quadrangles.
_____
/____/|
| ||
|____|/ (a bit crappy, i know)
right... 2D=3D if ∆z=0
and 2D=3D if Δx=0 or if Δy=0 😉
xor rather.. it would be 1D if both were zero and 0D if all dimensions are 0.
😁
well actually i used the or from the normal usage of language like in 'either... or..'! or so...
well actually i used the or from the normal usage of language like in 'either... or..'! or so...
From the Programming guide:
"One last step is needed before we can implement this, once we have passed our values through the rotation matrices we need to ‘project’ the pixels onto our 2D area, this is a little like interpreting the result to fit our window. The projection is:
x=x4/(z4+2);
y=y4/(z4+2);"
This stage is projecting the 3D into 2D, you can project orthogonally with just x=x3*c;y=y3*c where c is a constant for scaling. However the two lines above are a perspective projection, i.e. things further away are smaller.
You can google and search the forums for all this stuff, please just look harder
"One last step is needed before we can implement this, once we have passed our values through the rotation matrices we need to ‘project’ the pixels onto our 2D area, this is a little like interpreting the result to fit our window. The projection is:
x=x4/(z4+2);
y=y4/(z4+2);"
This stage is projecting the 3D into 2D, you can project orthogonally with just x=x3*c;y=y3*c where c is a constant for scaling. However the two lines above are a perspective projection, i.e. things further away are smaller.
You can google and search the forums for all this stuff, please just look harder
or at least ask your questions in a better way. 80% of this thread was trying to figure out what you actually wanted...
please, matt, read this, you seem to really need it:
please, matt, read this, you seem to really need it:
Can't we imply tomylobos link somewhere in the stickies? 😉
It could be pretty useful!
i specially liked this sentence: 😉
Write in clear, grammatical, correctly-spelled language
It could be pretty useful!
i specially liked this sentence: 😉
Write in clear, grammatical, correctly-spelled language
I think what I'm trying to say is:
I can create some 2D Objects and rotate in a "3rd dimension" *I think*, so how would I make a "3d" object? please and/or if replies @ expellidilition@gmail.com please? 0hh & tomy thanks
I can create some 2D Objects and rotate in a "3rd dimension" *I think*, so how would I make a "3d" object? please and/or if replies @ expellidilition@gmail.com please? 0hh & tomy thanks
my template + explanation.
learn, don't rip.
..and yes some use other methods for aspect ratio but i know some people use AVS with h>w so I prefer this one
learn, don't rip.
..and yes some use other methods for aspect ratio but i know some people use AVS with h>w so I prefer this one
Matt it's not our job to tell you which objects you shall render. Just try out something. For example you could pick a random 2D object you already made and assign 'i' to the third dimension (don't forget the whole roataion & 2D->3D code of course). Then that object will automatically extend along the z-axis. Sometimes it's nothing but 'trial and error'. 😉
Originally posted by MaTTFURYIf you make 2D object and rotate it in all 3 dimensions Z value of the object is static. To make 3D object and rotate it in all 3 dimensions just make Z value dynamic, like:
I think what I'm trying to say is:
I can create some 2D Objects and rotate in a "3rd dimension" *I think*, so how would I make a "3d" object? please and/or if replies @ expellidilition@gmail.com please? 0hh & tomy thanks
foo = pi*i * (n-1)*(2/5);
px = 0.5 * sin(foo);
py = 0.5 * cos(foo);
pz = 2.0 * (i-0.5);
//(...rotation foo...)
z = 1/(rz + 2); //note that z doesn`t do anything, its just used for sake of optimization
x = rx*z;
y = ry*z; But if you`re asking how to FORM a 3D object, then it`s bit more complicated, you just have to use your imagination and learn from other code (no, not rip, learn... as try to understand others code).
Originally posted by TomyLoboI never realised we were part of the hacker community.
or at least ask your questions in a better way. 80% of this thread was trying to figure out what you actually wanted...
please, matt, read this, you seem to really need it:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Does this mean I'm elite now?
/runs off
Mummy mummy I'm l33tx0r!!!
that guide applies to any kind of forum or help channel
So I'm... not... 3l33x0r?
no, if so you would have known earlier. Hackers know that they are cool. sorry bad luck you're none..
after all you're just erm... a fR34k or somethin.
after all you're just erm... a fR34k or somethin.
Does that mean I have to have my tatoo removed?
yepp, also you have to remove the pennant of the 'q-basic programming club (est. 1988)' and all the directories on your PC called 'HakzZ', 'WarezZZZz', 'Spy-Proggzz' etc.
Neither should you forget to remove the posters from the movie hackers and the one from matrix with neo infront of his PC from your walls...
Neither should you forget to remove the posters from the movie hackers and the one from matrix with neo infront of his PC from your walls...
stop being script kiddies 😁
Stop being dumb
i guess that's impossible. would be the same as if i told you: 'stop beeing WotL!'
where foo = point?
Being a (real) hacker has nothing to do with being 'cool'. Someone who hacks is someone who has a fondness for tinkering with computers and their insides. To hack something is basically the same as working on something, but hacking tends to have an air of untidyness associated with it.
I.e. "I hacked up a solution" = I came up with something that works but has wires hanging out and loose screws everywhere.
However, this negative connotation is not always present. Being up all night 'hacking at the source code' is an admirable thing.
Sometimes the meaning is that the method of coming up with the solution was chaotic, but that the end result is in fact very elegant and clean.
A 'hacker' is thus mostly the same as a 'programmer', with the difference that a hacker enjoys what he does. Working 9 to 5 fixing bugs in some mind numbing desktop tax form app is not hacking. People who do that are 'code monkeys'.
The media of course always refers to 'crackers' as 'hackers'. Some hackers complain endless about it, wearing the hacker badge and consistently pointing out to people that it's not the same as cracking. But most hackers just know when to use the word and when not to 😉. To the uninformed masses, saying "I'm a hacker but I don't break into computers" is similar to saying "I'm a pedophile but it's only platonic!".
Of course, the real crackers are usually also hackers: you can't learn how to break (into) things unless you know what they look like from the inside. Crackers who are not hackers are script kiddies.
I'm off to do some hacking :P.
I.e. "I hacked up a solution" = I came up with something that works but has wires hanging out and loose screws everywhere.
However, this negative connotation is not always present. Being up all night 'hacking at the source code' is an admirable thing.
Sometimes the meaning is that the method of coming up with the solution was chaotic, but that the end result is in fact very elegant and clean.
A 'hacker' is thus mostly the same as a 'programmer', with the difference that a hacker enjoys what he does. Working 9 to 5 fixing bugs in some mind numbing desktop tax form app is not hacking. People who do that are 'code monkeys'.
The media of course always refers to 'crackers' as 'hackers'. Some hackers complain endless about it, wearing the hacker badge and consistently pointing out to people that it's not the same as cracking. But most hackers just know when to use the word and when not to 😉. To the uninformed masses, saying "I'm a hacker but I don't break into computers" is similar to saying "I'm a pedophile but it's only platonic!".
Of course, the real crackers are usually also hackers: you can't learn how to break (into) things unless you know what they look like from the inside. Crackers who are not hackers are script kiddies.
I'm off to do some hacking :P.
Originally posted by UnConeDMost awesome quote taken out of context... EVER
I'm a pedophile but it's only platonic
UnConeD is platonicist