On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 21:36:37 +0200, Bald Eagle  
<cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:

>
>> So basically what I would like to see is the following:
>> A) Rotation angle of the camera that can be used as a rotation value for
>> an object taking into account the up vector as well. For instance if you
>> wanted to model a specific real-life camera and test it.
>
> I must admit, I don't really know what you're trying to accomplish.
> Are you just trying to make sure that the camera is always looking at a  
> certain object the same way after you move the camera?

I want an object to be able to act just like a camera so that if you  
rotate an object shaped like an arrow for instance with the camera  
rotation and translate it in the same position as the camera, the arrow  
should point at the camera's look_at position.

>> B) A look_at(Pos, LookAt, Up) transform macro for objects that rotates
>> an object exactly like a camera.
>
> I think that having a way to position objects absolutely, rather than  
> relative to the last position would be helpful in certain instances.
>
> Look_at ... what?  The camera?  There would need to be a way to define  
> what part of the object was the "front" or however you're thinking about  
> it.
>
Look_at a specified point "LookAt".
Revised:
look_at(Pos, LookAt, Up, Front)
Front would be a vector defining what the front of the object is.

> The UP part - do you want to just make sure it's the same vector  
> direction as the camera UP?  You should be able to do this by working  
> from the line of sight from the camera to the center of view.
> Use that axis as the center of your object's rotational movements.
>
If up is y then simply using only the x and y rotations without the z  
rotation seems to work. But probably not in all cases.

Thanks for mentioning screen.inc. I had forgotten about it. It might just  
help me with my scene.

-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message