VP camera clipping with non-perspective projection
-
On 09/03/2016 at 02:26, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Concerning the black line. I would assume this is an issue in compute_color. It appears as if it is dependant on the incident ray angle.
In the two images above, the top one shows a vanishing line the steeper the angle (downwards) while the parallel one, hitting the edge almost straight, is continously solid.Just an observation (as I don't know what compute_color is actually doing) but that would be the first place I would look for (zero multiplication, out of scope or similar..).
Maybe you can find out what the two passed values are when this happens and in that case add a correctional term to the passed values to make sure this doesn't screw up the color (of course if you have access to the function's source it would even be better to handle this in there directly).
-
On 09/03/2016 at 03:31, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for chiming in!
@MohamedSakr: Katachi is right, it computes the local position of the surface intersection. The
compute_color() function just range maps the intersection point in the bounding box into the range
[0..1] and returns that as the color.inline Vector compute_color(Vector const& p, Vector const& r) { return Vector( pns::clamp01(r.x > 1.0e-7 ? ((p.x / r.x + 1.0) * 0.5) : 0.0), pns::clamp01(r.y > 1.0e-7 ? ((p.y / r.y + 1.0) * 0.5) : 0.0), pns::clamp01(r.z > 1.0e-7 ? ((p.z / r.z + 1.0) * 0.5) : 0.0)); }@Katachi: I wish you were right, but it appears the problem really is TraceGeometry(). To verify this, I
set the color to plain red when the function returns false (ie. it didn't hit anything).if (!hit || !si.op || !si.op->link) { hit = false; color_line[x * cpp + 0] = 255; color_line[x * cpp + 1] = 0; color_line[x * cpp + 2] = 0; continue; }And the result is this:
If the problem were in compute_color(), the line would still be black. To clarify, if I move the camera
a tiny little bit, the line disappears (second image).Thanks for helping,
Niklas -
On 09/03/2016 at 03:52, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Ah I see, of course if it misses the hitpoint in the first place then it's indeed the TraceGeometry call itself. And I just saw that you even wrote that before! Sorry, me again blinded by the light.
Hmm, okay, at least your code looks fine (not sure if setting the RAYBIT_CUSTOM flag will help but I never understood what this flag tells C4D at all so this is wild speculation).
Have you tried using TraceGeometry() instead? Does this show the same problem?
-
On 09/03/2016 at 04:03, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Btw. what is the value of vd->ray->v (and its other properties) in case of the missed surface hit? Maybe you can perturb the direction slightly to workaround the missed hit in such a case?
-
On 09/03/2016 at 04:46, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Actually I wrote about TraceGeometry() already, but then the Plugincafe server was unreachable for a few
seconds and my original reply was lost.
So yeah, unfortunately I get the same behaviour with TraceGeometry().
And using RAYBIT_CUSTOM also doesn't change a thing.
About vd->ray, I don't know exactly where this value is derived from as it seems to change, but maybe
it's just not properly copied to the new VolumeData (the renderer is multithreaded). This is an excerpt
for the output of black pixels that should actually have been hit.No hit at 415, 190 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.206, -0.564, 0.8)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.679, -0.201, 0.706)} No hit at 420, 191 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.206, -0.564, 0.8)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.675, -0.203, 0.71)} No hit at 465, 200 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 0, 0), v: (0, 0, 0)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.632, -0.213, 0.745)} No hit at 425, 192 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.206, -0.564, 0.8)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.67, -0.204, 0.714)} No hit at 400, 193 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.206, -0.564, 0.8)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.692, -0.205, 0.692)} No hit at 515, 210 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.204, -0.563, 0.801)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.582, -0.223, 0.782)} No hit at 531, 220 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.201, -0.563, 0.802)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.564, -0.234, 0.792)} No hit at 530, 230 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.21, -0.565, 0.798)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.563, -0.246, 0.789)} No hit at 400, 201 vd->ray: Ray{p: (600, 0, 0), v: (0, 0, 0)} GetRay() : Ray{p: (600, 300, -600), v: (-0.691, -0.215, 0.691)}I tried setting *vd->ray = ray; after using GetRay(), but that didn't change anything except that in the
output you can see that the two rays are actually equal. :')This is what I used
if (!hit) { if (prev_hit) { info.lock.Lock(); GePrint(pns::fmt("No hit at %s, %s", x, y)); GePrint(pns::fmt(" vd->ray: %s", *vd->ray)); GePrint(pns::fmt(" GetRay() : %s", ray)); info.lock.Unlock(); } prev_hit = false; continue; }Thanks!
Niklas -
On 09/03/2016 at 05:08, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Thanks for the list (output is indeed due to threading). Hmm, there's nothing indicating anything "wrong" or which one would assume causing any trouble. Changes in the direction seem to fit the line and column changes of the ray creation.
And sorry, I was a bit unclear: I meant to change the direction of the ray you pass to TraceGeometry(). But it doesn't seem detectable from the values so one cannot simply add a perturbation value.
Well, I am out of ideas for now I'm afraid.
But would also be interested to know the outcome of this and if it is indeed a bug or at least what is causing this. -
On 09/03/2016 at 05:45, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Thank you anyway, Katachi.
Oh and about your idea of sligthly changing the direction of the ray, which
I forgot to address in my previous reply: Unfortunately I don't think that will be an option as the output
has to be very accurate. And it sounds very hack
But I can give it a try at least. -
On 09/03/2016 at 08:27, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
I still can't reproduce the issue here. Can you provide some simplified VideoPost code that reproduces the issue (without any third party functions etc.)?
Best wishes,
Sebastian -
On 09/03/2016 at 13:02, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hey Sebastian,
Yes, you can find a minimal example below. This is the result:
/** * Copyright (C) 2016 Niklas Rosenstein * All rights reserved. * * Demo plugin to reproduce second issue about the black pixels * in this PluginCafe Thread: * * https://developers.maxon.net/forum/topic/9383/12545_vp-camera-clipping-with-nonperspective-projection * * @file main.cpp * @created 2016/03/09 * @lastmodified 2016/03/09 */ #include <c4d.h> #include <res/c4d_symbols.h> class MyVideoPost : public VideoPostData { public: static NodeData* Alloc() { return NewObjClear(MyVideoPost); } /** * Called to allocate additional buffers required by this videopost. * We allocate one new buffer for our rendering. */ void AllocateBuffers(BaseVideoPost*, Render* render, BaseDocument* ) override { this->buffer_id = render->AllocateBufferFX( VPBUFFER_POSTEFFECT, "MyVideoPost", 32, true); } /** * Invoke our #DoRender() function after the actual rendering. */ RENDERRESULT Execute(BaseVideoPost*, VideoPostStruct* vps) override { switch (vps->vp) { case VIDEOPOSTCALL_RENDER: if (!vps->open) this->DoRender(vps); break; } return RENDERRESULT_OK; } private: /** * Called from #Execute() to render into the buffer allocated in * #AllocateBuffers() of which we saved the ID in #buffer_id. */ void DoRender(VideoPostStruct* vps) { VPBuffer* buffer = vps->render->GetBuffer(VPBUFFER_POSTEFFECT, this->buffer_id); if (!buffer) return; Int32 const cpp = buffer->GetCpp(); Int32 const line_width = buffer->GetBw() * cpp; AutoGeFree<Float32> line(NewMemClear(Float32, line_width)); if (!line) return; Bool hit; Ray ray; RayHitID lhit; SurfaceIntersection si; for (Int32 y = 0; y < buffer->GetBh(); ++y) { ClearMemType<Float32>(line, line_width); for (Int32 x = 0; x < buffer->GetBw(); ++x) { vps->vd->GetRay(Float(x), Float(y), &ray); hit = vps->vd->TraceGeometry(&ray, LIMIT<Float>::Max(), lhit, &si); if (!hit) continue; line[x * cpp + 0] = 1.0; line[x * cpp + 1] = 1.0; line[x * cpp + 2] = 1.0; } buffer->SetLine(0, y, buffer->GetBw(), line, 32, true); } } /** * ID of the buffer that we allocate in #AllocateBuffers(). */ Int32 buffer_id = 0; }; Bool PluginStart() { return RegisterVideoPostPlugin( 234324 /* TEST ID! */, "MyVideoPost", 0, MyVideoPost::Alloc, "", 0, 0); } void PluginEnd() { } Bool PluginMessage(Int32 msg, void* pdata) { return true; }Thanks for looking into it.
Niklas
-
On 10/03/2016 at 09:22, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
with your code I can now reproduce the issue. But if I add the above snippet to adjust the start point the faulty pixels disappear. Can you confirm that?
// Adjust Starting Point if ((camType == CAMERA_PARALLEL) || (camType == CAMERA_AXONOMETRIC)) { ray.p -= ray.v * 1000000.0; } hit = vps->vd->TraceGeometry(&ray, LIMIT<Float>::Max(), lhit, &si);Best wishes,
Sebastian -
On 10/03/2016 at 10:26, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
sorry I can not confirm that the faulty pixels disappear. The effect becomes stronger as described above.
I added the line directly without a check of the camera type beforehand:vps->vd->GetRay(Float(x), Float(y), &ray); ray.p -= ray.v * 100000.0;
Using your code instead doesn't seem to change the output, which makes sense since the perspective
projection is neither a parallel nor an axonometric projection, thus the ray position is not modified.Int32 camType = vps->vd->GetRayCamera()->type; if ((camType == CAMERA_PARALLEL) || (camType == CAMERA_AXONOMETRIC)) { ray.p -= ray.v * 1000000.0; }Best,
Niklas -
On 11/03/2016 at 05:39, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
what kind of system do you use to build and test the code?
Best wishes,
Sebastian -
On 11/03/2016 at 06:35, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
I use my own build system. But I have just pasted the code into a 100% fresh copy of the cinema4dsdk
Visual Studio project of Cinema 4D R16.050 and compiled it with VS2013 x64 (18.00.40418) and still
get the exact same result.Regards,
Niklas -
On 11/03/2016 at 07:40, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi Niklas,
my experience with VS2013 "msvc12" compiler, it got many pitfalls that produced wrong code many times.
I always rely on VS2012 compiler when calculations are intended, for VS2013 it is just memory handling. -
On 11/03/2016 at 08:02, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
does it only happen with R16 or also with the current release (17.048)?
best wishes,
Sebastian -
On 11/03/2016 at 08:17, xxxxxxxx wrote:
@Sebastian: I can indeed not reproduce this issue with R17.048. I have tested my original plugin in
the following configurations and combinations for which it didn't work are marked with an X.- R14 SDK | VS2013
-
[X] Cinema 4D R14 -
[X] Cinema 4D R15 -
[X] Cinema 4D R16 -
[ ] Cinema 4D R17 - R16 SDK | VS2013
-
[X] Cinema 4D R16 -
[ ] Cinema 4D R17
So this seems to be a bug that has been fixed in R17? I can already read the unfortunate message in
my mind that there is no solution for this .
@Mohamed: Where did you experience such pitfalls? As mentioned, it works with VS2013 in R17, so
it doesn't seem to be a problem with the compiler, at least in this case.Best,
Niklas -
On 12/03/2016 at 00:56, xxxxxxxx wrote:
it happened with a FLIP simulator, produced an unknown crash, after long debugging it was the compiler.
-
On 12/03/2016 at 16:35, xxxxxxxx wrote:
At this point I wouldn't rule out VS2013 completely just yet. R17 is VS2013 compatible, but the others are compatible to older VS versions. So, it could be something fixed in R17 or an issue with older APIs with VS2013. Definitely check for both possibilities (until we hear something official).
Just to add: I am using VS2012 for R15 and R16 builds. If you have VS2012 installed, have you attempted builds for older version APIs using it?
-
On 14/03/2016 at 02:52, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
I contacted the developers to ask if there were any relevant changes between R16 and R17.
Best wishes,
Sebastian -
On 16/03/2016 at 04:11, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello,
according to the developers there were no specific bugfixes for TraceGeometry() but many other bugfixes in the renderer that might influence the result. There are no know workarounds for the issue for Cinema versions older that R17.
Best wishes,
Sebastian