How would it possible to make an actor apply an effect on what's behind itself in Clutter ?
For example it could be a blur effect and we'd have something like this :
It is possible to add a ClutterEffect to an Actor but this will apply to the actor's content not what's behind it.
I could use this tutorial in order to draw a blurry background for my actor, but I would still need access to the rendered pixel data of what's behind my actor to apply blur on it.
(This is the same question as here but I coudn't find any answer)
No, you can't.
Actors are drawn in order, and effects are applied during each actor's paint cycle. This means that, in order to draw what's behind an actor, you'd have to draw the whole scene (as actors deeper in the graph may end up being drawn behind actors that have already been painted) without your actor, then redraw your actor on top - and then draw fully opaque actors that may cover your actor.
Related
I am working on an application with ARKit and SceneKit frameworks. In my application I have enabled surface detection (I followed the placing objects sample provided by Apple). How to find if the surface detected is no more available? That is, initially only if user has detected the surface in ARSession I am allowing him to place the 3D object.
But if the user moves rapidly or focuses somewhere, the detected surface area is getting lost. In this case if the user tries to place another object I shouldn't allow him to place it until he scans the floor again and get the surface corrected.
Is there any delegate which is available to let us know that the surface detected is no more available?
There are delegate functions that you can use. The delegate is the ARSCNViewDelegate
It has a function that is renderer(_:didRemove:for:) that fires when an ARAnchor has been removed. You can use this function to perform some operation when a surface gets removed.
ARSCNViewDelegate Link
There are two ways to “lose” a surface, so there’s more than one approach to dealing with such a problem.
As noted in the other answer, there’s an ARSCNViewDelegate method that ARKit calls when an anchor is removed from the AR session. However, ARKit doesn’t remove plane anchors during a running session — once it’s detected a plane, it assumes the plane is always there. So that method gets called only if:
You remove the plane anchor directly by passing it to session.remove(anchor:), or
You reset the session by running it again with the .removeExistingAnchors option.
I’m not sure the former is a good idea, but the latter is important to handle, so you probably want your delegate to handle it well.
You can also “lose” a surface by having it pass out of view — for example, ARKit detects a table, and then the user turns around so the camera isn’t pointed at or near the table anymore.
ARKit itself doesn’t offer you any help for dealing with this problem. It gives you all the info you need to do the math yourself, though. You get the plane anchor’s position, orientation, and size, so you can calculate its four corner points. And you get the camera’s projection matrix, so you can check for whether any point is in the viewing frustum.
Since you’re already using SceneKit, though, there are also ways to get SceneKit to do the math for you... Working backwards:
SceneKit gives you an isNode(_:insideFrustumOf:) test, so if you have a SCNNode whose bounding box matches the extent of your plane anchor, you can pass that along with the camera (view.pointOfView) to find out if the node is visible.
To get a node whose bounding box matches a plane anchor, implement the ARSCNViewDelegate didAdd and didUpdate callbacks to create/update an SCNPlane whose position and dimensions match the ARPlaneAnchor’s center and extent. (Don’t forget to flip the plane sideways, since SCNPlane is vertically oriented by default.)
If you don’t want that plane visible in the AR view, set its materials to be transparent.
The app I'm writing involves buttons that have a slight noise filter texture, which can be any size. For a standard button I'd simply use resizableImageWithCapInsets: but due to the texture, this causes unusual artefacts to appear on the resulting button.
A solution I have in mind, is to use the Core Image monochrome filter combined with the random noise filter to add the noise texture to a plain image. In theory this works, and in practice this has been shown to work (One example here) but these are all in cases where the button size is known at the point of invoking the CI code.
What I'm looking to do, is use the appearance proxies, so across the app I can simply set the style of UIBarButtonItems for instance.
Is there a way I can apply these CI filters to the buttons through the appearance proxies or isn't this possible? Would something like a category on UIImage to add noise work? I'm not entirely sure at which point the appearance proxy would actually invoke that code.
Any help is appreciated
OK So I finally solved it but found out some stuff on the way.
It seems you can create a category on UIImage and use that in the appearance proxy. I created a category to add noise, and it seemed to partly work, but I couldn't get it looking how I wanted as it wasn't quite rendering properly, but in the process of coding this discovered another method
resizableImageWithCapInsets:resizingMode:
Because the texture I was dealing with was simply noise, it could be tiled, so rather than the image now being stretched, the centre of the image is instead tiled which gives me the appearance I needed :)
I'm trying to make an application which allows the user to draw shapes to the canvas. Once drawn, I would like for the user to be able to select, move, resize, basically manipulate the shapes in any which way.
I have done something similar in XNA and that was quite easy due to the fact that there was a draw loop. In Silverlight there is no such thing as far as I understand and I am having trouble figuring out how to manage the objects on the canvas. As in what is the best way to manage the canvas' children collection to ensure appropriate response of the UI to what the user does.
Most examples out there are pretty basic and do not go anywhere near this kind of thing. I would be grateful if somebody who has done this before could tell me how they approached the problem.
Thinking about it for a while I think I figured out how it works.
There is a draw loop for the canvas, which is the draw loop of the top level parent container which it lives on.
The difference with XNA I guess is that the collection of items to draw on the canvas doesn't need to be explicitly drawn, since the canvas takes care of drawing its children automatically.
So, what I need is some way to hold on to any object I add to the canvas' children... I can then update the objects drawing properties and the changes will be reflected in the canvas next time it refreshes.
I guess a dictionary of some sort in which to store the items I put in the list might be best...?
Not a finished answer yet, but I guess I understand half of it now.
How can I wrap shapes around the world, so that a shape is shown more than once at low zoom?
Example:
I draw a polygon over USA.
I zoom out so that I can see two USA's.
I only see one polygon: ( I want to see two!
The map data effectively has 2 USAs. That implies you should actually want 2 polygons, one of which will be hidden most of the time.
Might as well cater for the worst case and treat a single USA as the exception rather than the rule.
You can't.
As others have already pointed out, the fact that, at far zoom levels certain features get repeated on either side of the map is an unwanted but inevitable side-effect of a projected surface that enables continuous scrolling. This has only been an issue in recent versions of the Bing Maps control - the earlier v6.x control prevented the map from panning across the 180th meridian.
I cannot think of any possible reason why you'd ever want to show two USAs, let alone target data to be positioned on each one. So the solution is to modify either the zoom level at which the map is displayed, or the size of the application window in which it is being displayed so that this situation doesn't occur.
In processing a group of items, I wanted to display a unified image of the status of the group, so I essentially made a Grid of a number of progressbars with transparent backgrounds and various colored foregrounds all at the same cell.
I'm running into some transparency artifacts (purple bar is actually purple under the green, and sometimes it draws over the top, etc) and it just seems a bit wasteful. So, I decided to make my own, but now I've got a bit of paralysis on how to do it. Do I use the DrawingContext in FrameworkElement's OnRender, or is there something simpler? Is there a set of general rules when it comes to making your own control?
I pondered switching to a pie chart since those are easy to come by, but its high time I did something not off-the-shelf.
Thanks!
I'm not quite sure how you intend the progressbar to combine different progresses, but if say the furthest along progress is at the bottom of the z-index and the least along progress is at the top, then I'd do something on the lines of this:
1) I would probably create a user control for this new progresbar.
2) It would have a property called NumberOfProgresses, that is tied with an array containing status of said progresses.
3) Each progress would be represented by a Border item (or perhaps something more suitable up the visual tree), because it's a simple wpf control with a background property. The background property would be set to nice a looking progress style and the progress color can be bound in the style to say the border's borderbrush property. Making it easy to set the color of the progress.
4) The user control would have a method UpdateProgress which takes the percentage value and the index of the progress in the array as parameters.
5) As progresses are updated you can either, just calculate the appropriate width (user control actual width * percentage) for the border and play around with the Z index to get it displayed at the top/bottom, or stack the borders horizontaly, set the least along progress as first, then for the rest of the progresses you'd have to substract previous progresses lengths to get the same effect.
This way there would be no transparency induced artifacts and no OnRender()...
Mind you, in WPF there should be no reason to mess with OnRender this and OnRender that, like it was required in WinForms with OnPaint.
Just set up the elements via code to get the look you want, and let WPF do it's rendering ;)
I can imagine one problem with this user control though. You'd have to provide feedback to the user as to which color belongs to which progress. But that would probably take you back to square one, meaning it's better/simpler to just display multiple progressbars.