<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:39 AM, Stephan Rogge <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Stephan.Rogge@tu-cottbus.de">Stephan.Rogge@tu-cottbus.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hello,<br>
<br>
@Christian:<br>
I cannot say, that we have problems by displaying data bigger than 7.5 MB.<br>
Our focus lies on CFD visualization. But when I understand the other threads<br>
right,<br>
this problem has been identified.<br>
<br>
@Nikhil:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
>> Further modifications was necessary in the the vtkVRStyleTracking in<br>
order<br>
>> to update the HeadPose. The proxygroup name must be changed to "views".<br>
The<br>
>> group name "interactorstyles" in the post mentioned above is NOT working,<br>
>> otherwise the plugin crash, since no proxy or property can be found and<br>
the<br>
>> pointer are still NULL after configuration.<br>
>><br>
</div><div class="im">> What you did is hardcoded to the view. The tracking style can be used for<br>
> tracking other things like the hand etc. This is configurable from the<br>
> state file (see document).<br>
<br>
</div>In my last post I wrote about the problem of defining the the proxy group<br>
name. I've made<br>
a mistake and addressed the class "vtkVRStyleTracking" for this<br>
modification. This is not<br>
the case.<br>
The class "vtkVRInteractorStyle" with its method<br>
"GetProxy( std::string name, vtkSMProxy ** proxy )" required that<br>
modification. And here<br>
I had to "hardcoded" the proxy group name "view" as a first parameter. I<br>
think, the group<br>
name shall be provided as an additional parameter or attribute in the *.pvsm<br>
file.<br>
<br>
Where I can deactivate QTSOCK? There is no option in cmake-gui visible. Or<br>
is this feature<br>
And the future?<br>
<br>
<br>
@ Aashish:<br>
Ok. So I have to concentrate more on tracking system calibration :-). What<br>
is the best approach<br>
of defining the room coordinate system? I have chosen a symmetric approach.<br>
Our system<br>
consists of two walls with an angle of 112° which means, those two walls<br>
construct a triangle.<br>
The user looks into the corner of the triangle. The origin of my room<br>
coordinate system is<br>
the center of the triangle base. All edge points of the two screens are<br>
defined in respect to<br>
this coordinate system. My question is, is this a good approach? Or should I<br>
place the origin<br>
directly on of those edge points?<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>If it is tracked, it does not matter much, In general people follow symmetric approach. But I have seen some setups where the origin was placed at the base corner point(for example at intersection of left and floor edge) (mostly I have it seen it in 4 - 6 sided VR). Also I am curious to know your tracker data units (meters, cm, inch? ). Can you share a picture of your system? </div>
<div><br></div><div>@Bill, where is the origin you have set for your 4 wall system? </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> </blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Nevertheless, many thanks for your valuable answers.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Stephan<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
>>> "Stephan Rogge" <<a href="mailto:Stephan.Rogge@tu-cottbus.de">Stephan.Rogge@tu-cottbus.de</a>> 2/8/2012 1:38 PM >>><br>
<br>
Hello,<br>
<br>
I’ve start to work intensively with the VRPlugin from git-master and want to<br>
get some feedback. First of all it works almost great :-). As a tracking<br>
system I’m using A.R.TrackPack2 with two infrared cameras and their VRPN<br>
server implementation.<br>
<br>
To be able to compile that Plugin some modifications were necessary:<br>
* As mentioned in this post<br>
(<a href="http://www.paraview.org/pipermail/paraview/2012-February/023816.html" target="_blank">http://www.paraview.org/pipermail/paraview/2012-February/023816.html</a>) the<br>
proxy API undergone some changes. But it seems, that the author of this post<br>
mixed up the parameter order. He referred to proxy name and proxy group.<br>
But it has to be swapped...<br>
* Not important to me but required to compile without errors: In<br>
vtkVRUIPipe.h the flag QTSOCK is checked for existence. I had to put it in<br>
manually ("#define QTSOCK 1"). Don't know why.<br>
<br>
Further modifications was necessary in the the vtkVRStyleTracking in order<br>
to update the HeadPose. The proxygroup name must be changed to "views". The<br>
group name "interactorstyles" in the post mentioned above is NOT working,<br>
otherwise the plugin crash, since no proxy or property can be found and the<br>
pointer are still NULL after configuration.<br>
<br>
But so far, I was able to use the VRPlugin in ParaView in a two-side VE and<br>
I've got the feeling, that virtual object placed in front of the screens...<br>
:-)<br>
<br>
Now, I have a kind of problem. When I am moving parallel (left to right) to<br>
the screens, I can observe a sort of rotation which can be not described as<br>
moving parallax. It seems, that the rotation point lies in the center of my<br>
projection displays. Object which came out of screen "standing" not on the<br>
same position. They are flying around. So, my question is addressed to<br>
experienced Virtual Reality user: Is this described behavior right or not?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Stephan<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>| Aashish Chaudhary <br>| R&D Engineer <br>| Kitware Inc. <br>| <a href="http://www.kitware.com">www.kitware.com</a> <br>