I have a scene containing a Path Node (the red dots with the blue lines)
I want to use the Path Node as a list of ordered checkpoints (easy to add with the editor), for a character, with some kind of obstacle avoidance.
I can get the list of all steps along the Curve3D, with $Path.get_curve().get_baked_points(), the distance between two steps being $Path.bake_interval. But that's not what I need for my purpose. I only want the red dots, not all increment, since some of them are inside the obstacles.
Is there any mean to get a list of the red dots from script ? Or some configuration on Path or Curve3D to force all the increments being the red dots ?
Otherwise, could you suggest an alternative way to add, as easily as that, a list of ordered checkpoints ?
You can get the number of points of the curve with get_point_count, and then get the position of each one with get_point_position. For example:
for index in curve.get_point_count():
print(curve.get_point_position(index))
Should print the positions you want.
Related
I've been trying to find a way to replicate the following network graph format in R using DiagrammeR/GraphViz, but without success (ignore the thick black arrow on N1): https://i.stack.imgur.com/oHpQz.png
The graph is a directed graph and each edge in a certain direction either ends with an arrowhead (-->) if the edge value is positive, or a circle/odot (--o) if the edge value is negative. Between a pair of nodes (ex. N1 -- A1), there can be an edge N1 --> A1 and an edge A1 --o N1, and these need to be concentrated so that the two edges look like one line with an arrowhead on one end and a circlehead on the opposite end (like this: o--->). These cannot be parallel or look like two edges ideally.
Another requirement is that the nodes have to be in very specific positions and remain there throughout model simulations where edges might change. From what I have tried and the documentation I have read, this is not possible to do in DOT format, but is possible in neato format.
This is where I get a problem. In neato, I can align the nodes exactly where I want them by defining their x,y positions. However, when I use concentrate = true to create the o---> edge from two otherwise parallel edges, only one type of arrowhead remains. So an edge that's supposed to look like o---> ends up looking like ---> or o---.
This is not a problem in DOT format as concentrate = true does what I want it to do, but in DOT I cannot assign exact node positions. I have tried getting around this using node ranks but without much luck. It seems to stack nodes I want in different ranks within the same rank. As well, concentrate = true doesn't seem to work for edges between nodes within the same rank, as it leaves them as two separate curved edges ---> and o--- without concentrating them.
The reason why I need this to work is because I'm running model simulations where the edges change, and I need to generate hundreds of such graphs. For easy comparison, the nodes need to stay in the same place for consistency.
This is the closest I could come up with using neato format (nodes are positioned the way I want but it's not showing the proper o---> for all the black edges minus self-edges; red edges are true one-way links): https://i.stack.imgur.com/YJBY7.jpg
If only the edges showed up as the proper o---> format, this would be perfect for my needs. If you know of any way to fix this issue using DiagrammeR/GraphViz, or even another program, I would be so grateful. Thanks!
You probably don't need concentrate. Look at arrowtail and dir (https://www.graphviz.org/doc/info/attrs.html#d:arrowtail and https://www.graphviz.org/doc/info/attrs.html#d:dir) and neato -n
digraph c {
graph[label="can neato do the work?"]
node[shape=circle]
a [pos="100,100"]
b [pos="200,100"]
c [pos="300,100"]
a->b [dir=both arrowtail=odot]
c->c [dir=both arrowtail=odot arrowhead=none]
}
Giving:
I want to write a program with 'geometry automata'. I'd like it to be a companion to a book on artistic designs. There will be different units, like the 'four petal unit' and 'six petal unit' shown below, and users and choose rulesets to draw unique patterns onto the units:
I don't know what the best data structure to use for this project is. I also don't know if similar things have been done and if so, using what packages or languages. I'm willing to learn anything.
All I know right now is 2D arrays to represent a grid of units. I'm also having trouble mathematically partitioning the 'subunits'. I can see myself just overlapping a bunch of unit circle formulas and shrinking the x/y domains (cartesian system). I can also see myself representing the curve from one unit to another (radians).
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks!!
I can't guarantee that this is the most efficient solution, but it is a solution so should get you started.
It seems that a graph (vertices with edges) is a natural way to encode this grid. Each node has 4 or 6 neighbours (the number of neighbours matches the number of petals). Each node has 8 or 12 edges, two for each neighbour.
Each vertex has an (x,y) co-ordinate, for example the first row in in the left image, starting from the left is at location (1,0), the next node to its right is (3,0). The first node on the second row is (0,1). This can let you make sure they get plotted correctly, but otherwise the co-ordinate doesn't have much to do with it.
The trouble comes from having two different edges to each neighbour, each aligned with a different circle. You could identify them with the centres of their circles, or you could just call one "upper" and the other "lower".
This structure lets you follow edges easily, and can be stored sparsely if necessary in a hash set (keyed by co-ordinate), or linked list.
Data structure:
The vertices can naturally be stored as a 2-dimensional array (row, column), with the special characteristic that every second column has a horizontal offset.
Each vertex has a set of possible connections to those vertices to its right (upper-right, right, or lower right). The set of possible connections depends on the grid. Whether a connection should be displayed as a thin or a thick line can be represented as a single bit, so all possible connections for the vertex could be packed into a single byte (more compact than a boolean array). For your 4-petal variant, only 4 bits need storing; for the 6-petal variant you need to store 6 bits.
That means your data structure should be a 2-dimensional array of bytes.
Package:
Anything you like that allows drawing and mouse/touch interaction. Drawing the connections is pretty straightforward; you could either draw arcs with SVG or you could even use a set of PNG sprites for different connection bit-patterns (the sprites having partial transparency so as not to obscure other connections).
I wish to be able to separate my graph into subcomponent such that the removal of any single node would create no further sub-components (excluding single nodes). As an example see the two images below.
The first image shows the complete graph. The second image shows the sub-components of the graph when it has been split into the smallest possible subcomponents. As can be seen from the second image, the vertex names have been maintained. I don't need the new structure to be a single graph it can be a list of graphs, or even a list of the nodes in each component.
The component of nodes 4-5-6 remains as removing any of the three nodes will not create a new component as the node that was broken off will only be a single node.
At the moment I am trying to put together an iterative process, that removes nodes sequentially in ascending degree order and recurses into the resultant new components. However, it is difficult and I imagine someone else has done it better before.
You say you want the "smallest subcomponents of 2 nodes of greater", and that your example has the "smallest possible subcomponents". But what you actually meant is the largest possible subcomponents such that the removal of any single node would create no further sub-components, right? Otherwise you could just separate the graph into a collection of all of the 2-graphs.
I believe, then, that your problem can be described as finding all "biconnected components" (aka maximal biconnected subgraphs of a graph): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biconnected_component
As you said in the comments, igraph has the function biconnected_components(g), which will solve your problem. :)
I'm trying to plot a graph from a list of values stored in a vector.
I have a list of 1000 elements and another one of 900 elements.
I'd like to start to draw my second line at x=100 to make sure the last point of both lines are at x=1000.
I can't use "padding" by adding 0 to the second data vector.
I found the segment function which allow to draw from a starting to an end point but it seems that it can only draw..segments?
Do you know what option I should use to begin the drawing of a line to a given abscissa ?
I'm trying to find similar or equivalent function of Matlabs "Bwareaopen" function in OpenCV?
In MatLab Bwareaopen(image,P) removes from a binary image all connected components (objects) that have fewer than P pixels.
In my 1 channel image I want to simply remove small regions that are not part of bigger ones? Is there any trivial way to solve this?
Take a look at the cvBlobsLib, it has functions to do what you want. In fact, the code example on the front page of that link does exactly what you want, I think.
Essentially, you can use CBlobResult to perform connected-component labeling on your binary image, and then call Filter to exclude blobs according to your criteria.
There is not such a function, but you can
1) find contours
2) Find contours area
3) filter all external contours with area less then threshhold
4) Create new black image
5) Draw left contours on it
6) Mask it with a original image
I had the same problem and came up with a function that uses connectedComponentsWithStats():
def bwareaopen(img, min_size, connectivity=8):
"""Remove small objects from binary image (approximation of
bwareaopen in Matlab for 2D images).
Args:
img: a binary image (dtype=uint8) to remove small objects from
min_size: minimum size (in pixels) for an object to remain in the image
connectivity: Pixel connectivity; either 4 (connected via edges) or 8 (connected via edges and corners).
Returns:
the binary image with small objects removed
"""
# Find all connected components (called here "labels")
num_labels, labels, stats, centroids = cv2.connectedComponentsWithStats(
img, connectivity=connectivity)
# check size of all connected components (area in pixels)
for i in range(num_labels):
label_size = stats[i, cv2.CC_STAT_AREA]
# remove connected components smaller than min_size
if label_size < min_size:
img[labels == i] = 0
return img
For clarification regarding connectedComponentsWithStats(), see:
How to remove small connected objects using OpenCV
https://www.programcreek.com/python/example/89340/cv2.connectedComponentsWithStats
https://python.hotexamples.com/de/examples/cv2/-/connectedComponentsWithStats/python-connectedcomponentswithstats-function-examples.html
The closest OpenCV solution to your question is the morphological closing or opening.
Say you have white regions in your image that you need to remove. You can use morphological opening. Opening is erosion + dilation, in that order. Erosion is when the white regions in your image are shrunk. Dilation is (the opposite) where white regions in your image are enlarged. When you perform an opening operation, your small white region is eroded until it vanishes. Larger white features will not vanish but will be eroded from the boundary. The subsequent dilation step restores their original size. However, since the small element(s) vanished during the erosion step, they will not appear in the final image after dilation.
For example consider this image where we want to remove the small white regions but retain the 3 large white ellipses. Running the following code removes the white regions and displays the clean image
import cv2
im = cv2.imread('sample.png')
clean = cv2.morphologyEx(im, cv2.MORPH_OPEN, np.ones((10, 10)))
cv2.imshwo("Clean image", clean)
The clean image output would be like this.
The command above uses a square block of size 10 as the kernel. You can modify this to suit your requirement. You can even generate a more advanced kernel using the function getStructuringElement().
Note that if your image is inverted, i.e., with black noise on a white background, you simply need to use the morphological closing operation (cv2.MORPH_CLOSE method) instead of opening. This reverses the order of operation - first the image is eroded and then dilated.