Raycaster in scratch.mit.edu isn't working - list

I need help with a raycasting script I'm working on. For some reason, instead of drawing the map, it just draws a solid line on one side. I am following the Scratch Wiki's tutorials as well as using a working version. Here's my code. https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/348658266/ Due to the complexity of this project, it is hard to create a MRE, but keep in mind that I can't seem to move around and the iteration code is going into numbers outside the range it should.

Related

Raycasting render 2d chest CT scans to 3d using OPENGL/C++

I am going to split this question in 3 parts
First, I've been given this problem, and I don't know where to start, if you have been solving related problem, would you give me some hints and keywords to help me do some more research?
I have done some research on my own
So here is some 2D chest CT scans (sorry due to reputation rule i can't implement images directly)
All photos are in the same angle. So I think I can simply read each photo to a vector of pixels, do some thresh holding to make all black and black-ish pixels going to be a non-colored pixel. Next, I'll create a vector called vector_of_photo of those vectors. Then the index of each vector in vector_of_photo are now the Z-index.
Now I can render a 3d photo from those vectors of pixels right?
In the second place, I got trouble understand raycasting algorithm,
I think the idea here is, when I already got a box of pixel then everytime I rotate the box, it cast straight-lines from that angle of the camera to the box, each line found a has-colored pixel going to stop casting and render that pixel (or more specific, copy the pixel to the exactly location on the plane).
Did I understand it correctly?
At last, the OPENGL/c++ part is just the option I think I'm going to use to solve this problem. And I'm not pretty sure it is a good idea or not, so give me some more hint about the programming language, library or module I should take a look at.
I happen to be working on the same problem in my spare time. Haha :)
Here is one approach to your problem:
Load the images into your application, such that you get the 3D volumetric dataset that you describe
Remove all points that don't fit within some range of values (e.g. 0.4/1.0 to 0.6/1.0 brightness). You may need to apply preprocessing and filtering.
Fit a mesh to the resulting point cloud with open-source software. Here is a good blog post about that
https://towardsdatascience.com/5-step-guide-to-generate-3d-meshes-from-point-clouds-with-python-36bad397d8ba
Take the resulting mesh (probably, an STL file) and visualize it in any software your want (Blender 3D, Unity 3D, Cinema 4D, a custom OpenGL application), anything really.
My own approach to this problem is very similar to the one you suggest in your question, and I have already made some headway. Therefore, I thought it would be good to suggest another route.
NOTE Please be aware that what you are working on is not a trivial problem. It's a large project, and there are many Commerical companies that put years into doing just this. This is a great project for learning OpenGL, rendering, and other concepts. It's perfectly doable, but you may be looking at several months of work, and lots of trial and error. Good luck!
Its not often that two people would happen to work on the same problem, so if you want to discuss further, feel free to contact me over linkedin and/or post a comment below. www.linkedin.com/in/michael-sohnen-a2454b1b2

Supersampling AA with PyOpenGL and GLFW

I am developing a application with OpenGL+GLFW and Linux as a target platform.
The default rasterizing has VERY strong aliasing. I have implemented FXAA on top of my pipeline and I still got pretty strong aliasing. Especially when there's some kind of animation or movement, the edges of meshes are flickering. This literally renders the whole project useless.
So, I thought I would also add a supersampling and I have been trying to implement it for two weeks already and still can't make it work. I start to think it's not possible with the combination PyOpenGL+GLFW+Ubuntu18.04.
So, the question is, can I do a supersampling by hand (without OpenGL extentions)? At the end of my (deferred) rendering pipeline I save all the data from different passes to the hard drive, so I thought I would do something like this:
Render the image with 2x/3x resolution to the texture.
Save the texturebuffer to the array.
Get the average pixel's value from each 2x2/3x3/4x4 block
of this array.
Save it to the hard drive.
Obviously, it's gonna be slower than mulstisampling with OpenGL extention and require more memory, but I don't need high fps and I have a pretty small resolution (like 480x640 or similar) so it might work out.
Do you guys have any thoughts about it? I would be glad to any advice.

How do I output a visual to the screen using C++?

I am a Computer Science student working on a project, and I need some help. I'm writing this in C++. In my project, I basically need some way to output a graphic to the screen. It doesn't have to be pretty at all, but I don't know how to do it. If there are any libraries that would be helpful I could use them, but I don't know what they are.
Basically I am writing a program in which an object can be moved around in space. It will have a starting point, and an ending point, and I want to be able to output its path as it moves along it, so that the user can actually watch the object moving around in space. I've thought about trying something with ray tracing, but I don't think that's quite what I'm looking for. Like I said, it doesn't have to be pretty. A dot moving to another dot would be good enough, I just need to have something. Thanks for your help.
In another thread, they suggest using Cairo. I used it in the past for creating a pdf to animate (page by page), but it seems it can display directly to screen as well integrating with OpenGL.

Infinite, noise-generated tile map in Cocos2d/ios?

I have been working for weeks on a game concept in java, and have decided it will be best to implement the game in iOS, primarily for iPad. I wrote everything myself in java and am now researching what I need to do to convert.
I haven't decided on a framework but am eying Cocos2d. However, I've not been able to find any information on a recommended method to make an infinite map. Infinite side-scrolling yes, but mine is is "infinite" in all directions.
Currently, I generate "chunks" of 16x16 tiles that are assigned biome/type info by a perlin/simplex noise generator. I wrote custom code that loads/unloads each chunk of tiles as you move. You may move in all directions.
Is this possible with the Cocos2d library? Or will I need to re-write my special rendering/map movement code in Objective-c?

What has happened with opengl? What kind of nightmare is it now?

I used opengl 2 years ago. In one afternoon I read a tuto, I drew a cube (and then learned how to load any 3d model) and learned home to move the camera around with the mouse. It was easy, less than 100 lines of codes. I didnt get the pipeline completely but I was able to do something.
Now I need to refresh opengl for some basic stuff, basically I need to load a 3D model (any model) and move the model around, with the camera fixed. Something I thought would be another afternoon.
I have spent 1 day and have nothing working. I am reading the recommended tuto http://www.arcsynthesis.org/gltut/ I dont get anything, now to draw just a cube you need a lot of lines and working with lots of buffer, use some special syntax for shaders.... what the hell I only want to draw a cube. Before it was just defining 6 sides.
What is going on with opengl? Some would argue that now is great, I think it is screwed.
Is there any easy library to work with Something that would make my life easier?
GLUT - http://www.opengl.org/resources/libraries/glut/
ASSIMP - http://assimp.sourceforge.net/
These two libraries are all you need to make a simple application where you import a model (various formats). Read it's documentation and examples to get a better understanding on how you can "glue" OpenGL and ASSIMP to work.
Documentation
As to is OpenGL more hard to comprehend? No. What I've learned in recent years from OpenGL is that GFX programming is never simple or done in a few lines of code, you have to be organised, you have to be careful and even a simple primitive (e.g cube) needs to have more than 100 lines of code to make it decent and flexible (for example if you want more subdivisions on your polygons or texturing).
If you learned it only two years ago, then the tutorials were extremely outdated. Immediate Mode has been known to be deprecated for a very, very long time. Actually the first plans to abandon it and display lists date back to 2003.
Vertex Arrays have been around since version 1.1, and they have been the preferred method for sending geometry to OpenGL ever since; in immediate mode every vertex causes several function calls, so for any seriously complex object you spend more time managing the function call stack, than doing actual rendering work. If you used Vertex Arrays consequently since their introduction, switching over to Vertex Buffer Objects is as complicated as just inserting or replacing a few lines.
The biggest hurdle using OpenGL-3 is in Windows, where one has to use a proxy context to get access to the extension functions required to select OpenGL-3 capabilities for context creation. However again no big hurdle, 20 lines of code top. And some programs, like mine for example, create a proxy GL context anyway, to which all shareable data is uploaded, which allows to quicly destroy/recreate visible contexts, yet have full access to textures, VBOs and stuff (you can share VBOs, which is another reason for using them instead of plain vertex arrays; this might not look like something big, at least not if the context is used from a single process; however on plattforms like X11/GLX OpenGL contexts can be shared between X11 clients, which may even run on different machines!)
Also the existance of functions like the matrix manipulation stack led people into the misconception, OpenGL was some matrix math library, some even believed it was a particularily fast one. Neither is true. The removal of the matrix manipulation functions was a very important and right thing to do. Every serious OpenGL application will implement their very own matrix math anyway. For example any modern game using some kind of physics engine used to directly use in OpenGL (glLoadMatrix, or glUniformMatrix) the transform matrix spit out by the physics calculation, completely bypassing the rest of the matrix functions. This also means that the sole reason to have multiple matrix stacks (GL_PROJECTION, GL_MODELVIEW, GL_TEXTURE, GL_COLOR), namely being able to use the same set of manipulation functions on several matrices, was obsoleted and could have been replaced by something like glLoadMatrixSelected{f,d}v(GLenum target, GLfloat *matrix). However Uniforms and shaders already were around, so the logical step was not introducing a new function, but to reuse existing API, which had been used for this task already, anway, and instead remove what's no longer needed.
TL;DR: The new OpenGL-3 API greatly simplyfies using it. It's a lot clearer, has fewer pitfalls and IMHO is also more newbie-friendly.
You don't have to use buffer objects. You can use the deprecated immediate mode. It will be slower, but if you don't really care then go ahead and use OpenGL the way you used to. NeHe has some excellent tutorials on OpenGL 1.x stuff.
Swiftless has some good tutorials (only a few very basic ones) on OpenGL 3.x and 4.x, but the learning curve is, as you've found, very steep.
Does it have to be openGL? XNA offers an ability to draw 3d models without breaking your back.. Could be worth a look