I check like this:
enter code here
var point = new g.LatLng(parseFloat(lat),parseFloat(lng));
var bounds = map.getBounds();
if (bounds.contains(point))
{
the point is in the viewport
}
But when I change the zoom level, thefore the coordinates of the viewport, the "invisible" point is NOT detected as "visible", I mean in the viewport.
Point is not a marker !
I wrote a hack that might work in your scenario. As far as I tested, it works when there's not a lot of the world repeated. I know this hack is unreliable if the world is displayed twice or more. So if you can set the map's minZoom, you would prevent such cases.
The idea is to divide the map in a left and right half, and check whether the marker is in either half.
Here's the hack, use carefully
http://jsfiddle.net/QeR2D/3/
If you have more than the whole circumference of the Earth in your viewport, things can go wrong.
The left-hand edge may be further east than the right-hand edge. map.getBounds() gets the wrong result in this case.
The left-hand edge may be west of the right-hand edge, but area defined by the longitudes of both may not include the point of interest.
Here's an image of a map I developed for another answer which demonstrates that. The left-hand edge is at 83°E and the right-hand edge at 162°E. The markers are at 54°W and 8°W and neither are within map.getBounds() — they don't lie between 83°E and 162°E — even though they are obviously on the map.
I'm not aware of any method in the API which allows this to be catered for.
Related
I am not sure how to put this problem in a single sentence, sorry if the title is misleading.
I am currently developing a simple terrain editor with a circle-shaped brush size. The image below shows a few cases that represent my problem.
additional info: the square size is fixed and uniform and in the current version, my concern is only to find which one is hit and which one is not (the amount of region covered is important for weighting the hit, but probably not right now)
My current solution (which is not even correct for a certain condition) is: given a hit in a position (x, y) with radius r, loop through all square from (x-radius, y-radius) to (x+radius, y+radius) and apply 2-D box to circle collision detection. But I don't think this is optimal (or even correct IMO).
Can anyone help me with this one? Thank you
Since i can't add a simple comment due to bureaucracy on this website i have to type it out here.
Anyway you're in luck since i was trying to do this recently as well! The way i did it is i iterated through the vertex array and check if the current vertex falls inside the radius of the circle. But perhaps what you want is to check it against each quad center and if that center falls inside the radius then add the whole quad as it's being collided.
Of course depending on the size of your grid the performance will vary so it's good to try to iterate through as few quads as needed. Though accessing these quads from the array is something you have to figure out yourself.
I would like to know how to compute rotation components of a rectangle in space according to four given points in a projection plane.
Hard to depict in a single sentence, thus I explain my needs.
I have a 3D world viewed from a static camera (located in <0,0,0>).
I have a known rectangular shape (an picture, actually) That I want to place in that space.
I only can define points (up to four) in a spherical/rectangular referencial (camera looking at <0°,0°> (sph) or <0,0,1000> (rect)).
I considere the given polygon to be my rectangle shape rotated (rX,rY,rZ). 3 points are supposed to be enough, 4 points should be too constraintfull. I'm not sure for now.
I want to determine rX, rY and rZ, the rectangle rotation about its center.
--- My first attempt at solving this constrint problem was to fix the first point: given spherical coordinates, I "project" this point onto a camera-facing plane at z=1000. Quite easy, this give me a point.
Then, the second point is considered to be on the <0,0,0>- segment, which is about an infinity of solution ; but I fix this by knowing the width(w) and height(h) of my rectangle: I then get two solutions for my second point ; one is "in front" of the first point, and the other is "far away"... I now have a edge of my rectangle. Two, in fact.
And from there, I don't know what to do. If in the end I have my four points, I don't have a clue about how to calculate the rotation equivalency...
It's hard to be lost in Mathematics...
To get an idea of the goal of all this: I make photospheres and I want to "insert" in them images. For instance, I got on my photo a TV screen, and I want to place a picture in the screen. I know my screen size (or I can guess it), I know the size of the image I want to place in (actually, it has the same aspect ratio), and I know the four screen corner positions in my space (spherical or euclidian). My software allow my to place an image in the scene and to rotate it as I want. I can zoom it (to give the feeling of depth)... I then can do all this manually, but it is a long try-fail process and never exact. I would like then to be able to type in the screen corner positions, and get the final image place and rotation attributes in a click...
The question in pictures:
Images presenting steps of the problem
Note that on the page, I present actual images of my app. I mean I had to manually rotate and scale the picture to get it fits the screen but it is not a photoshop. The parameters found are:
Scale: 0.86362
rX = 18.9375
rY = -12.5875
rZ = -0.105881
center position: <-9.55, 18.76, 1000>
Note: Rotation is not enought to set the picture up: we need scale and translation. I assume the scale can be found once a first edge is fixed (first two points help determining two solutions as initial constraints, and because I then know edge length and picture width and height, I can deduce scale. But the software is kind and allow me to modify picture width and height: thus the constraint is just to be sure the four points are descripbing a rectangle in space, with is simple to check with vectors. Here, the problem seems to place the fourth point as a valid rectangle corner, and then deduce rotation from that rectangle. About translation, it is the center (diagonal cross) of the points once fixed.
I am trying to write an application to draw schematic diagrams which contain rectangles, lines and circles. Now I want to add another functionality to drag a rectangle to different position. The problem I am facing is to detect whether I have clicked within a rectangle or not. I know there is a function like Rectangle.Contains(Point). To use such method I need to use a for loop to check against each rectangle. If I have a large number of rectangles present, then its not wise to use this method. Is there any other way to do this task.
You need a computer graphics textbook, this and similar problems are often discussed.
If memory serves me, make sure the point is below the top edge of the rectangle, above the bottom edge, left of the right edge and right of the left edge.
Regarding testing a bunch of rectangles in a loop. Consider having a circle that each rectangle fits in, a bounding circle. First test to see if the point is farther from the origin of the circle than the radius of the circle. If so there is no need to test the rectangle, its a miss. OK, that was a very theoretical answer. In reality calculating the distance from the point to the origin can be a very expensive calculation, it involves a square root, it may be faster to do the four comparisons of the point in rectangle check. Again if memory servers me, we don't really care what the distance from the origin is only if it is greater than the radius. So only partially perform the distance calculation, omitting the final square root, and compare against the square of the radius. Of course you still need to experiment and profile to make sure this bounding circle check is faster than just doing the regular point in rectangle check and you need to make sure you will have sufficient misses to offset the hits where you will end up doing both the bounding circle and rectangle checks.
You need to use a spatial index to find quickly in which rectangle the mouse is. I suggest a R-tree, here is the theorical part:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-tree
And the c#,implementation:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cspatialindexrt/
Create an rtee, add your rectangles then call the rtree.nearest method with the mouse coordinate to know the rectangles containing the mouse cursor. You can play with the distance parameter.
Hope it helps,
Anben Panglose.
I would go about dividing the display region into a quadrant.
Then place the rectangles into top-left, top-right, bottom-left, bottom-right grids.
Placing them means, creating a list for every quadrant and placing the rectangles in it.
Once the point is clicked, determine which quarter it belongs to and search in those rectangles only. This approach reduces your linear search by 4 times.
Remember that you need to also take care of overlapping where the point can belong to many rectangles. Here the z-order of your rectangles matter. So while the list is maintained for a quadrant, it should be sorted with it's z-order as a key.
Hope this helps.
May be something like this?
public bool isRectangelContainPoint(RectangleF rec, PointF pt)
{
if (pt.X >= rec.Left && pt.X <= rec.Right && pt.Y <= rec.Bottom && pt.Y >= rec.Top)
return true;
else
return false;
}
I have been looking at posts about determining if a point lies within a polygon or not and the answers are either too vague, abstract, or complex for me. So I am going to try to ask my question specific to what I need to do.
I have a set of points that describe a non-straight line (sometimes a closed polygon). I have a rectangular "view" region. I need to determine as efficiently as possible whether any of the line segments (or polygon borders) pass through the view region.
I can't simply test each point to see if it lies within the view region. It is possible for a segment to pass through the region without any point actually inside the region (ie the line is drawn across the region).
Here is an example of what I want to determine (red means the function should return true for the set of points, blue means it should return false, example uses straight lines and rectangles because I am not an artist).
Another condition I want to be able to account for (though the method/function may be a separate one), is to determine not just whether a polygon's border passes through the rectangular region, but whether the region is entirely encompassed by the polygon. The nuance here is that in the situation first described above, if I am only concerned with drawing borders, the method should return false. But in the situation described here, if I need to fill the polygon region then I need the function to return true. I currently do not need to worry about testing "donut" shaped polygons (thank God!).
Here is an example illustrating the nuance (the red rectangle does not have a single vertex or border segment passing through the on-screen region, but it should still be considered on-screen):
For the "does any line segment or polygon border pass through or lie on screen?" problem I know I can come up with a solution (albeit perhaps not an efficient one). Even though it is more verbose, the conditions are clear to me. But the second "is polygon region on screen?" problem is a little harder. I'm hoping someone might have a good suggestion for doing this. And if one solution is easily implemented on top of the other, well, booya.
As always, thank you in advance for any help or suggestions.
PS I have a function for determining line intersection, but it seems like overkill to use it to compare each segment to each side of the on-screen region because the on-screen region is ALWAYS a plain [0, 0, width, height] rectangle. Isn't there some kind of short-cut?
What you are searching for is named a Collision Detection Algorithm A Google search will lead you to plenty of implementations in various language as well as a lot of theory
There are plenty of Geometric theory behind, from the simplest bisector calculus to Constrained Delaunay Triangulations and Voronoi Diagrams (that are just examples). It depends on the shape of Object, the number of dimensions and for sure the ratio between exactness needed and computing time afforded ;-)
Good read
PS I have a function for determining
line intersection, but it seems like
overkill to use it to compare each
segment to each side of the on-screen
region because the on-screen region is
ALWAYS a plain [0, 0, width, height]
rectangle. Isn't there some kind of
short-cut?
It's not an overkill, its neccessary here. The only kind of shortcut I can think of is to hardcode values [0, 0, width, height] into that function and simplify it a bit.
I'm doing some image processing, and I need to find some information on line growing algorithms - not sure if I'm using the right terminology here, so please call me out on this is needs be.
Imagine my input image is simply a circle on a black background. I'd basically like extract the coordinates, so that I may draw this circle elsewhere based on the coordinates.
Note: I am already using edge detection image filters, but I thought it best to explain with a simple example.
Basically what I'm looking to do is detect lines in an image, and store the result in a data type where by I have say a class called Line, and various different Point objects (containing X/Y coordinates).
class Line
{
Point points[];
}
class Point
{
int X, Y;
}
And this is how I'd like to use it...
Line line;
for each pixel in image
{
if pixel should be added to line
{
add pixel coordinates to line;
}
}
I have no idea how to approach this as you can probably establish, so pointers to any subject matter would be greatly appreciated.
I'm not sure if I'm interpreting you right, but the standard way is to use a Hough transform. It's a two step process:
From the given image, determine whether each pixel is an edge pixel (this process creates a new "binary" image). A standard way to do this is Canny edge-detection.
Using the binary image of edge pixels, apply the Hough transform. The basic idea is: for each edge pixel, compute all lines through it, and then take the lines that went through the most edge pixels.
Edit: apparently you're looking for the boundary. Here's how you do that.
Recall that the Canny edge detector actually gives you a gradient also (not just the magnitude). So if you pick an edge pixel and follow along (or against) that vector, you'll find the next edge pixel. Keep going until you don't hit an edge pixel anymore, and there's your boundary.
What you are talking about is not an easy problem! I have found that this website is very helpful in image processing: http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/wksheets.htm
One thing to try is the Hough Transform, which detects shapes in an image. Mind you, it's not easy to figure out.
For edge detection, the best is Canny edge detection, also a non-trivial task to implement.
Assuming the following is true:
Your image contains a single shape on a background
You can determine which pixels are background and which pixels are the shape
You only want to grab the boundary of the outside of the shape (this excludes donut-like shapes where you want to trace the inside circle)
You can use a contour tracing algorithm such as the Moore-neighbour algorithm.
Steps:
Find an initial boundary pixel. To do this, start from the bottom-left corner of the image, travel all the way up and if you reach the top, start over at the bottom moving right one pixel and repeat, until you find a shape pixel. Make sure you keep track of the location of the pixel that you were at before you found the shape pixel.
Find the next boundary pixel. Travel clockwise around the last visited boundary pixel, starting from the background pixel you last visited before finding the current boundary pixel.
Repeat step 2 until you revisit first boundary pixel. Once you visit the first boundary pixel a second time, you've traced the entire boundary of the shape and can stop.
You could take a look at http://processing.org/ the project was created to teach the fundamentals of computer programming within a visual context. There is the language, based on java, and an IDE to make 'sketches' in. It is a very good package to quickly work with visual objects and has good examples of things like edge detection that would be useful to you.
Just to echo the answers above you want to do edge detection and Hough transform.
Note that a Hough transform for a circle is slightly tricky (you are solving for 3 parameters, x,y,radius) you might want to just use a library like openCV