OK. I'll have to fix that... Sent from my iPad
> On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:02 PM, Nathaniel Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ok, this gives the orientation I would expect, but the left and right eye > views are now switched. Probably and artifact of reversing the azimuth > direction... > > Nathaniel > >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Gregory J. Ward <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> I went ahead and checked in the suggested changes -- give it a try! >> >> -Greg >> >>> From: "Gregory J. Ward" <[email protected]> >>> Date: January 16, 2017 1:32:00 PM PST >>> >>> I can probably make the suggested changes. Let's hear from Mark to see >>> what he says. I was also wondering about the azimuth direction, but I >>> don't have a phone or the app I need to check things. >>> >>> -Greg >>> >>>> From: Nathaniel Jones <[email protected]> >>>> Date: January 16, 2017 1:15:01 PM PST >>>> >>>> I just ran the view360stereo.cal file on a model that I've been working >>>> with. The image that's generated is mirrored left-to-right from what I'd >>>> expect. Other than that, the ODS projection works decently well in my >>>> cardboard viewer. >>>> >>>> A few other notes: The .cal file name in the example in comments doesn't >>>> match the new name of the .cal file. Also, this is perhaps unnecessary, >>>> but I'd like to be able to specify the forward direction to appear in the >>>> center of the image. >>>> >>>> For my own work, I've gone ahead and implemented the ODS view in source >>>> code. I've called it VT_ODS (-vto) and added a new parameter -vi for >>>> inter-pupillary distance. I haven't bothered with the EX and EZ parameters >>>> for neck rotation yet. Also, the implementation isn't complete (I'm not >>>> sure what viewloc() does, for example), but it's working for my purposes. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Nathaniel >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Gregory J. Ward <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> I checked in the file, renaming it to "view360stereo.cal" in the >>>>> src/cal/cal folder. I made a few modifications, which I hope are >>>>> improvements, but I don't have a viewer that I can test it with. Can >>>>> someone give it a try? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> -Greg >>>>> >>>>> > From: "Gregory J. Ward" <[email protected]> >>>>> > Date: January 11, 2017 4:53:07 PM PST >>>>> > >>>>> > Thanks, Mark. >>>>> > >>>>> > I'll take a closer look at it and generate some test images with your >>>>> > .cal file. Also, if there are any features people want to have that >>>>> > they would feel helpful or important, let us know! >>>>> > >>>>> > -Greg >>>>> > >>>>> >> From: Mark Stock <[email protected]> >>>>> >> Date: January 11, 2017 4:40:54 PM PST >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Andy, Greg, >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I'm happy to have it included, if it's up to par. I'm not happy with >>>>> >> the neck rotation portion of that code, and if you want the pixel >>>>> >> edges to line up right on azimuth=0, I need to put a 0.5 in there >>>>> >> somewhere. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Mark >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On 1/11/17, Andy McNeil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>> Hi Greg, >>>>> >>> Mark Stock created the attached cal file for rendering ODS views. If >>>>> >>> it is >>>>> >>> okay with Mark, can we add the cal file to the radiance distribution? >>>>> >>> Andy >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Gregory J. Ward >>>>> >>> <[email protected]> >>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> Thanks, Andy. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Have you already created a .cal file to generate the appropriate ray >>>>> >>>> origins and directions for this? If not, I could take a crack at it. >>>>> >>>> Seems like an easier method than adding a new view type, especially >>>>> >>>> since >>>>> >>>> we would need a new parameter for the stereo offset to get it to do >>>>> >>>> what >>>>> >>>> we >>>>> >>>> want. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Regarding rpiece, you can always use the rtrace -n option to get an >>>>> >>>> equivalent speed-up. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>> -Greg >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> *From: *Andy McNeil <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> *Date: *January 11, 2017 1:00:31 PM PST >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi Greg, >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> The viewpoint, or ray origin, is different for each column of pixels >>>>> >>>> in a >>>>> >>>> stereo ODS rendering. If you start with a viewpoint, and draw a >>>>> >>>> circle >>>>> >>>> with >>>>> >>>> diameter that is the distance between one's pupils, then the origin >>>>> >>>> for >>>>> >>>> each ray should be at a point where the ray is tangent to the circle >>>>> >>>> (on >>>>> >>>> the left side of the circle for left eye and right side for right >>>>> >>>> eye). >>>>> >>>> It's explained & illustrated well here: >>>>> >>>> https://developers.google.com/ >>>>> >>>> vr/jump/rendering-ods-content.pdf >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I don't see how clipping planes could be used to modify the ray >>>>> >>>> origin, >>>>> >>>> but I could be wrong. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> And this goes a ways back in the thread, but one instance where >>>>> >>>> smaller >>>>> >>>> than 180° x 360° sized equirectangular views would be necessary is >>>>> >>>> if a >>>>> >>>> user wanted to use rpiece to render the full view. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Best, >>>>> >>>> Andy >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Gregory J. Ward >>>>> >>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Victor, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I thought that there was some trick to doing stereo 360° views that >>>>> >>>>> involved rotating the eye positions with the ray directions to keep >>>>> >>>>> them >>>>> >>>>> at >>>>> >>>>> right angles. Andy (McNeil), can you help us out? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -Greg >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From: *Victor LRG <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Date: *January 10, 2017 2:14:48 AM PST >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I agree with Nathaniel that the general use would be similar to >>>>> >>>>> cylindrical >>>>> >>>>> or angular fisheye views in terms of view apertures. Personally, I >>>>> >>>>> use >>>>> >>>>> the equirectangular view in four combinations: 180-360 deg >>>>> >>>>> horizontally >>>>> >>>>> and >>>>> >>>>> 90-180 deg vertically, and then as a base for other fancier view >>>>> >>>>> types >>>>> >>>>> when >>>>> >>>>> I need them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> With regards to the stereo offset I wonder if it could be added >>>>> >>>>> with a >>>>> >>>>> bit of work using the standard clipping plane offset as an stereo >>>>> >>>>> one? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Victor >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9 January 2017 at 15:59, Guglielmetti, Robert < >>>>> >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I’ll keep an eye out, should this be added to the standard palette >>>>> >>>>>> of >>>>> >>>>>> views in the source. I think it’s pretty easy to add it to the Qt >>>>> >>>>>> rvu... >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 1/8/17, 10:18 AM, "Gregory J. Ward" <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Victor (& Nathaniel), >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> I am happy to take a look at the code and see how much effort it >>>>> >>>>>>> would >>>>> >>>>>> be >>>>> >>>>>>> to integrate. I have a question first, however. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Is the "equirectangular" view useful for anything less than a full >>>>> >>>>>>> panorama? Would people want to use it for smaller/different >>>>> >>>>>>> views, or >>>>> >>>>>> do >>>>> >>>>>>> you always set vertical to 180° and horizontal to 360° in every >>>>> >>>>>>> application? >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> If you only use this view for one purpose, then I wonder if it is >>>>> >>>>>>> really >>>>> >>>>>>> worth having a view implemented in Radiance, which needs to handle >>>>> >>>>>>> every >>>>> >>>>>>> possible setting correctly. Also, I wonder in such a case if you >>>>> >>>>>>> have >>>>> >>>>>>> tested every possible (legal) setting? >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>>>> -Greg >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> Radiance-dev mailing list >>>>> >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>> Radiance-dev mailing list >>>>> >>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>> Radiance-dev mailing list >>>>> >>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >> Radiance-dev mailing list >>>>> >> [email protected] >>>>> >> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Radiance-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Radiance-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Radiance-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Radiance-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
_______________________________________________ Radiance-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
