threejs texture causes "GL ERROR :GL_INVALID_OPERATION : glDrawElements" - dictionary

I'm trying to apply a texture to a geometry created at runtime, reading a binary asset from a remote server.
I create the geometry assigning UVs (geometry.faceVertexUvs = uvs;), normals (face.vertexNormals.push(...)) and tangents (face.vertexTangents.push(...)).
If I try to create a mesh with a basic material, there are no problems, but when I create the mesh with that geometry and I try to apply my texture, webgl doesn't display any geometry and I get this warning:
[.WebGLRenderingContext]GL ERROR :GL_INVALID_OPERATION : glDrawElements: attempt to access out of range vertices in attribute 1
Does anybody know what is going on? I think that my geometry has something wrong, because if I use a THREE.Sphere, I can actually apply the texture.
But everyone told me that in order to apply texture I need UVs, and I have'em.
I think that my faceVertexUvs is wrong.
The real question is: geometry.faceVertexUvs.length should be equal to geometry.vertices.length, or it should be equal to geometry.faces.length ?
Thank you very much.
PS: I've already read the following posts
WebGL drawElements out of range?
Three JS Map Material causes WebGL Warning
THREEjs can't use the material on the JSON Model when initializing. Gives me WebGL errors
Loading a texture for a custom geometry causes “GL_INVALID_OPERATION” error

problem solved!!
#GuyGood: you're right when you say that every vertex need a UV-Vector2, but it's wrong to say that geometry.faceVertexUvs.length should be equal to geometry.vertices.length...
it seems that facevertexUvs is a matrix, and not an array..well, it is an array of arrays..not properly a matrix..in fact I think it can be used to handle multi-mesh objects..if facevertexUvs.length == 3, we have 3 submeshes, so 3 arrays..each one of them has a length equal to the number of faces of a particular submesh..and every face knows the UV mapping about the 3 vertices defining that face..
hope this is clear and helpful!!

Related

How to implement KdTree using PCLPointCloud2 used in loadOBJfile in point cloud library?

Okay, so I have one OBJ file which I read into PCLpointcloud2. Now I want to feed it into a K-dTree. Which is not taking PCLPointCloud2 as input. I want to query any general point if it lies on the surface of my OBJ file.
I am finding it hard to understand their documentation. So how can it be done?
Plus, kindly point me to a good reference easily interpretable. And what is "PointT" BTW? Is it custom build type defined by us? please elaborate.
Look at the code in the provided tool pcl_mesh_sampling (in the PCL code directory under tools/mesh_sampling.cpp). It is relatively simple. It loads a model from PLY or OBJ then for each triangle it samples random points from the triangle. The final point cloud then undergoes a voxel-grid sample to make the points relatively uniform. Alternatively, you can just run the pcl_mesh_sampling program on your obj file to get an output PCD which you can then visualise with pcl_viewer before loading the PCD file into your own code.
Once you have the final point cloud, you can build and use a KD-Tree as per http://pointclouds.org/documentation/tutorials/kdtree_search.php
PointT is the template argument. The point cloud library can handle a variety of point types, from simple PointXYZ (having just x,y,z) to more complicated points like PointXYZRGBNormal (having x,y,z,normal_x,normal_y,normal_z, curvature, r, g, and b channels). Each algorithm is templated on the point type that you want to use. It would probably be easier if you used PointXYZ with your OBJ file, so use pcl::PointXYZ for all your template arguments. For more on templates see http://www.tutorialspoint.com/cplusplus/cpp_templates.htm and http://pointclouds.org/documentation/tutorials/adding_custom_ptype.php.
Update (reply to latest comment)
Added here because this reply is too long for a comment.
I think I see what you are getting at. So when you sample points from the point cloud & build a KD-tree of the object surface, and for each point you keep track which faces are nearby that point (probably all the faces adjacent to the face from which the point was sampled should be sufficient? Just one face is definitely insufficient). Then when the query point is given, you find the nearest point in the KD-tree and check whether the query point is on the "outside" or inside of the full list of nearby faces associated with that point in the KD-tree. If it's on the "inside" of all of them perhaps it is an interior point. But I cannot guarantee that this is true. That is my thinking on that question at the moment. But I do wonder if you want a mesh-based approach really. By the way, if you break your mesh up into convex parts then you can have nice guarantees when processing each convex part.

Constrained (Delaunay) Triangulation

For a university project I need to implement a computer graphics paper that has been relased a couple of years ago. At one point, I need to triangulate the results I get from my simulation. I guess its easier to explain what I need looking at a picture contained within the paper:
Let's say I already have got all the information it takes to reconstruct the contour lines that you can see in the second thumbnail. Using those I need to do some triangulation using those siluettes as constrains. I have searched the internet for triangulation libraries like CGAL, VTK, Triangle, Triangle++, ... but I always ended up throwing my hands up in horror. I am not a good programmer and it seems impossible to me to get into one of those APIs before the deadline of this project passes.
I would appreciate any kind of help like code snipplets, tips, etc...
I know that the algorithms need segments (pairs of points) as input, so let's say I have got one std::vector containing all pairs of points defining the siluette as well as the left and right side of the rectangle.
Can you somehow give me a code snipplet for i.e. CGAL that I could use for my purpose? First of all I just want to achieve the state of the third thumbnail. Lateron I will have to do some displacement within the "cracks" and finally write the information into a VBO for OpenGL rendering.
I have started working it out with CGAL. One simple problem still drives me crazy:
It is possible to attach informations (like ints) to points before adding them up to the triangulator object. I do this since I need on the one hand an int-flag that I use lateron to define my texture coordinates and on the other hand an index which I use so that I can create a indexed VBO.
http://doc.cgal.org/latest/Triangulation_2/Triangulation_2_2info_insert_with_pair_iterator_2_8cpp-example.html
But instead of points I only want to insert constraint-edges. If I insert both CGAL returns strange results since points have been fed into two times (once as point and once as point of a constrained edge).
http://doc.cgal.org/latest/Triangulation_2/Triangulation_2_2constrained_8cpp-example.html
Is it possible to connect in the same way as with points information to "Constraints" so that I can only use this function cdt.insert_constraint( Point(j,0), Point(j,6)); before I iterate over the resulting faces?
Lateron when I loop over the triangles I need some way to access the int-flags that I defined before. Like this but not on acutal points but the "ends" defined by the constraint edges:
for(CDT::Finite_faces_iterator fit = m_cdt.finite_faces_begin(); fit != m_cdt.finite_faces_end(); ++fit, ++k) {
int j = k*3;
for(int i=0; i < 3; i++) {
indices[j+i] = fit->vertex(i)->info().first;
}
}

Detecting floor under an object in PCL

I'm very new to PCL.
I try to detect the floor under an object for checking if the object topples or is it positioned horizontally.
I've checked API and found the method: pcl::PointCloud< T >::at.
Seems like I could detect Z-value of a point using at. Is it correct?
If yes, I'm confused, how it should work. Mathematically a point is infinite small. On my scans I see the point-density the smaller the more distinct they are in Z-direction.
Will at always return a point? Is the value the mean of nearest physical points?
As referenced in the documentation, pcl::PointCloud< T >::at returns the information of a single point (the coordinates plus other data depending on the point format) given column and row information (roughly the X,Y in the depth image). For this reason, this method just works on organized clouds.
Unfortunately, not every point is a valid point. Unless you filter the point cloud, you could find invalid measurements (points which have NaN components). This is pretty normal, just discard those points using a filter. Your intuition is right, the point density is smaller the further away you go from the sensor.
As for what you're trying to achieve, you should take a look at the planar segmentation tutorial on the PCL website and at the Table Object Detector software by Nicolas Burrus. The latter extracts a plane, and the clusters of objects on top of it.

How does a non-tile based map works?

Ok, here is the thing. Recently i decided i wanted to understand how Random map generation works. I found some papers and some arguments. The most interesting one was "Diamond Square algorithm" and "Midpoint Displacement". I still have to try to apply those to a software, but other than that, i ran into this site: http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~amitp/game-programming/polygon-map-generation/
As you can see, the idea is to use polygons. But i have no idea how to apply that a Tile-Based map, not even how to create those polygons using the tools i have (c++ and sdl). I am assuming there is no way to do it ( please correct me if i am wrong.) But if i am not, how does a non-tile map works, and how are these polygons generated?
This answer will not give you directly the answers you're looking for, but hopefully will get you close enough!
The Problem
I think what blocks you is how to represent the data. You're probably used to a 2D grid that simply represent the type of each tile. As you know, this is fine to handle a tile-based map, but doesn't properly allow you to model worlds where tiles are of a different shape.
Graphs
What I suggest to you, is to see the problem a bit differently. A grid is nothing more than a graph (more info) with nodes that have 4 (or 8 if you allow diagonals) implicit neighbor nodes. So first, what I would do if I was you, would be to move from your strict standard 2D grid to a more "loose" graph, where each node has a position, a position, a list of neighbors (in most cases you'll have corners with 2 neighbors, borders with 3 and "middle" tiles with 4) and finally a rendering component which simply draws your tile on screen at the given position. Once this is done, you should be able to have the exact same results on screen that you currently have with your "2D Tile-Based" engine by simply calling the rendering component with each node who's bounding box (didn't touch it in what you should add to your node, but I'll get back to this later) intersects with the camera's frustum (in a 2D world, it would most likely if the position +/- the size intersects the RECT currently being drawn).
Search
The more generic approach will also help you doing stuff like pathfinding with generic algorithms that explore nodes until they find a valid path (see A* or Dijkstra). Even if you decided to stick to a good old 2D Tile Map game, these techniques would still be useful!
Yeah but I want Polygons
I hear you! So, if you want polygons, basically all you need to do, is add to your nodes a list of vertices and the appropriate data that you might need to render your polygons (either vertex color, textures and U/V maps, etc...) and update your rendering component to do the appropriate OpenGL (this for example should help) calls to draw your nodes. Once again, the first step to iteratively upgrade your 2D Tile Engine to a polygon map engine would be to, for each tile in your map, give each of your nodes two triangles, a texture resource (the tile), and U/V mappings (0,0 - 0,1 - 1,0 and 1,1). Once again, when this step is done, you should have a "generic" polygon based tile map engine. The creation of most of this data can be created procedurally by calculating coordinates based on tile position, tile size, etc...
Convex Polygons
If you decide that you ever might need NPCs to navigate on your map or want to allow your player to navigate by clicking the map, I would suggest that you always use convex polygons (the triangle being the simplest for of a convex polygon). This allows your code that assume that two different positions on the same polygon can be navigated to in straight line.
Complex Maps
Based on the link you provided, you want to have rather complex maps. In this case, the author used Voronoi Diagrams to generate the polygons of the map. There are already solutions to do triangulation like that, but you might also want to use other techniques that are easier to work with if you're just switching to 3D like this one for example. Once you have interesting results, you should consider implementing serialization to save/open your map data from the game. If you want to create an editor, be aware that it might be a lot of work but can be worth it if you want people to help you creating maps or to add elements to the maps (like geometry that's not part of the terrain).
I went all over the place with this answer, but hopefully it helps!
Just iterate over all the tiles, and do a hit-test from the centre of the tile to the polys. Turn the type of the tile into the type of the polygon. Did you need more than that?
EDIT: Sorry, I realize that probably isn't helpful. Playing with procedural algorithms can be fun and profitable. Start with a loop that iterates over all tiles and chooses randomly whether or not the tile is occupied. Then, iterate over them again and choose whether it is occupied or its neighbour is.
Also, check out the source code for this: http://dustinfreeman.org/toys/wall7-dustin.html

Calcultate dimensions of mesh using vertex and face data

I have 3d models made in Blender. I need to load them for further rendering using OpenGL ES.
I also want to implement picking, so I need to know object dimensions. So far I did not find option like "export dimensions" while exportiong to wavefront obj in Blender. I decided to calculate them manually.
So, I have vertex and face data. How do I calculate object dimensions? It may be done roughly, whatever. Or maybe I'm on the wrong tracK?
Isn't it just the minimum and maximum coordinate value found for each vertex for each of the X, Y and Z axes?

Resources