I am having some trouble drawing real-world objects on an SVG map.
context:
I have a map which I converted to an svg file (inkscape), this map is then displayed on a web-page with 100% width/height.
I then want to draw points on this map, those points have coordinates in mm (on a very different and bigger scale), so I need to apply a scale factor and a conversion to... pixels?
that's where the difficulty is for me, SVG file uses "user units" measure system, it is then drawn scaling everything to the frame where it is loaded, I would like to scale my real-world point coordinates system to a "user units"-like reference system so that such points can be dynamically drawn on the page.
the web page is html/svg + javascript and I am using svg.js library to draw everything on it.
any clue about how to make ma transformation to align everything up?
Related
I am working on a program that generates crosshatched images and now stippled images as SVG from raster input. With stippling however, representing each dot as a filled circle has made it such that medium to large sized raster images can result in SVG files that are so large Illustrator and InkScape fail to open them.
I am however currently making no effort to optimize the representation of stippling in the SVG. Is there perhaps an SVG element that is specially for representing a collection of points? Or can a polyline be styled such that it is rendered as just its vertices represented as circles?
Just as the question title, I'm a bit confused with thoes stuff, especially viewport and render area. AFAIK, viewport is used in VS stage, while render area is used in FS stage, if viewport is small than render area, what will happen?
THanks.
The viewport specifies how the normalized device coordinates are transformed into the pixel coordinates of the framebuffer.
Scissor is the area where you can render, this is similar to viewport in that regard but changing the scissor rectangle doesn't affect the coordinates.
RenderArea is the area of the framebuffer that will be changed by the renderpass. This lets the implementation know that not the entire frame buffer will be changed and gives it opportunity to optimize by for example not including some tiles in a tile based architecture. It is the application's responsibility that no rendering happens outside that area, for example by making sure the scissor rects are always fully contained within the renderArea.
Framebuffer size and attachment size are related in that the attachments must be at least as large as the framebuffer.
if viewport is small than render area, what will happen?
Nothing special, the render commands will render within the viewport. The other way around (render area smaller than the viewport) will result in undefined values in the framebuffer.
When using an feDisplacementMap svg filter, my smooth svg lines are getting all jagged. I could probably render it large and then shrink it down, but isn't SVG supposed to be able to anti-alias?
Okay, so I figured out the answer to my own question: the filterRes attribute: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/filters.html#FilterElementFilterResAttribute
In my testing, on Chrome, increasing the filterRes slows things down pretty dramatically.
SVG filters process inputs at the pixel level, not the vector level. As far as an SVG filter is concerned, it's been handed a big rectangle of RGBA pixels to work with. Results from a displacement map can look pixelated because a filter has no idea where the edges that have been displaced are - it's all just pixels as far as it is concerned. (The old semi-transparent pixels that used to be the anti-aliasing have been displaced as well.) However, sometimes you can add another filter or two to solve any problem that this creates. Creative ways to solve this problem:
Take the post-displacement graphic, blur it with a radius of a few pixels then blend the blur back into the original graphic.
Take the post-displacement graphic, do a luminance to alpha conversion, then use that alpha map with a diffuse lighting effect to add a fake anti-alias lighting effect.
Use a convolvematrix with edge detection values to extract edges from the graphic, blur that result and blend it back into the source graphic.
Depending on your graphic, you might be able to use an erode or dilate filter, but that tends to produce boxy highlights and might not work. And of course, you can always tweak your input in SVG (using stroke effects) to "pre-antialias" your source graphic so the result doesn't look so odd.
I've been struggling with this for a while.
Presently, I have a grid of 100 by 100 tiles, which belong to a Map.
The Map implements IDrawable. I call Draw() and it draws itself at 0,0 which is fine.
However, I want to expand this to draw essentially a viewport. The player will be drawn on the screen in the middle, and thus I want to display say, 10 tiles in each direction (rather than the entire map).
I'm having trouble thinking up the architecture for this one. I'm in the mindset that things should draw themselves, ie I say player1.Draw() and it draws itself. This would have worked before, where it drew the player at x,y on the screen, but with a viewport it will no longer know where to draw itself.
So should the viewport be told to draw, and examine every object in the game and draw those which are visible? Should the map tiles be objects that are subjected to this? Or should the viewport intelligently draw the map by coupling both together?
I'd love to know how typical scrolling tile games accomplish this.
If it matters, I'm using XNA
Edit to add: Can you do graphics manipulation such as trying the HTML rendering approach, where you tell things to draw, and they return a graphic of themselves, and then the parent places the graphic in the correct location? I'm thinking, if I had 2 viewports side by side for splitscreen, how would I stop them drawing outside the edges?
Possible design:
There's a 2D "world" that contains object instances.
"Object instance" is a sprite reference + its coordinates in the world.
When you draw scene, you request list of visible objects that exist in given 2D area, THEN you draw them.
With such design world can be very huge.
I'm in the mindset that things should draw themselves, ie I say player1.Draw() and it draws itself.
visible things should draw themselves. Objects outside of viewport are not visible.
, how would I stop them drawing outside the edges?
Not sure about XNA, but OpenGL has "scissors test"/"glViewport" and Direct3D 9 has "SetViewport" method that allows you to use part of the screen/window for rendering. There are also clipplanes and stencil buffer (using stencil for 2D clipping is overkill, though) You could also render to texture then render the texture. There are many ways to deal with this.
So should the viewport be told to draw, and examine every object in the game and draw those which are visible?
For a large world, you shouldn't examine every object, because it will be slow. You should be able to find visible object without testing every one of them. For that you'll need some kind of space partitioning - quad trees (because we are in 2D), k-d trees, etc. This way you should be able to handle few thousands (or even hundreds of thousands) of objects, as long as you don't see them all at once.
Should the map tiles be objects that are subjected to this?
If you keep drawing invisible things, FPS will drop.
and they return a graphic of themselves
For 2D game this may be very slow. Remember KISS principle.
Some basic ideas, not specifically for XNA:
objects draw themselves to a "virtual screen" in world coordinates, they don't draw themselves to the screen directly
drawable objects get a "graphics context" object which offers you a drawing API. The "graphics context" knows about the current viewport bounds and realizes the coordinate transformation from world coordinates to screen coordinates (for every drawing operations). The graphics context also does the direct drawing to the screen (or to a background screen buffer, if you need double buffering).
when you have many objects outside the visible bounds of your viewport, then as a performance optimization, your drawing loop can make a before-hand bounds-check for your objects and test if they are completely outside the visible area. If so, there is no need to let them draw themselves.
It is my understanding that a texture atlas is basically a single texture that contains many smaller textures and that they are useful for making games or animations faster because they allow you to access many animation frames by loading a single file rather than files for each and every frame.
So, in discussions of texture atlases, I see the term "quad" mentioned everywhere - Is a quad simply the x, y, width and height of an individual texture from a texture atlas or am I missing something?
Quadrilateral - not necessarily a rectangle.