Cartesian plane issues.
RichardRahl
Join Date: 2011-06-15 Member: 104594Members
Join Date: 2011-06-15 Member: 104594Members
This is more of a tweak for the devs to do to spark and it's not really important but grates on my nerves is the issue with the X,Y,Z coords if you place your view top down with red and blue making an L which is the wa ya normal Cartesian plane looks like the letters are in the wrong format, with Y(green) being height left to right being Z(blue) and up and down being X(red), when in actuality red which should be up and down should be Y(red) left to right being X(blue) and height being Z(green)
TL;DR
current
x=red
y=green
z=blue
where in fact it should be
x=blue
y=red
z=green
EDIT:
Also i've noticed, that the current plane orientation the arrows make an upside down L instead of a regular L
TL;DR
current
x=red
y=green
z=blue
where in fact it should be
x=blue
y=red
z=green
EDIT:
Also i've noticed, that the current plane orientation the arrows make an upside down L instead of a regular L
Comments
The spark editor uses the same axis settings as modeling programs like Maya as its more based on modeling apps then other mapping tools
Y = Green = up
X = Red = Left to right
Z = Blue = Front to back
Same with top view, maya = upside down L.
So pretty much as intended
but that's the issue, this isn't a modelling program, it's a mapping program, it makes no sense for it to use the same system as a modelling program, that's like saying lets use the same engine configuration for a mack truck in a jet.
Besides, I would argue that x,y,z being colored with r,g,b makes sense, as both are the common order you say the components in.
Also, I am pretty sure spark editor uses a space, not plane, at least in the perspective where you see colored lines for all 3 axes.
Besides, I would argue that x,y,z being colored with r,g,b makes sense, as both are the common order you say the components in.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
it's not the point of how you say it being fluid, from being mathematically or dimensionally correct, most of the programs i've used to create things has been proper Cartesian format, if not making it a change for everyone can we atleast please have the option, I find it very confusing when looking at dimensions of things.
Isn't both proper math? Sounds like you are only complaining on labels and colors :P
No they arnt both proper math.
Buy they are logical
this system works as the following.
the colors they picked are the 3 primary colors (with light). RGB
Now the 3 axis are XYZ.
so they just colored the axis accordingly
x=R=red
y=G=green
Z=B=blue
to determine what axis is what they looked at the perspective, which forms a cross like this <!--sizeo:7--><span style="font-size:36pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->*<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
and they just named them from the top, making the left one X, the center one Y and the right one Z.
So it might not be mathematical but honestly, math has nothing to do with this anyway.
So its not based on proper math, but it sure as hell is based on a proper way of logic thinking.
As a maya user i dont have a problem with this myself, even though i used to map like crazy in hammer.
So they both are widely used, different ways to do the same thing and both are valid.
this system works as the following.
the colors they picked are the 3 primary colors (with light). RGB
Now the 3 axis are XYZ.
so they just colored the axis accordingly
x=R=red
y=G=green
Z=B=blue
to determine what axis is what they looked at the perspective, which forms a cross like this <!--sizeo:7--><span style="font-size:36pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->*<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
and they just named them from the top, making the left one X, the center one Y and the right one Z.
So it might not be mathematical but honestly, math has nothing to do with this anyway.
So its not based on proper math, but it sure as hell is based on a proper way of logic thinking.
As a maya user i dont have a problem with this myself, even though i used to map like crazy in hammer.
So they both are widely used, different ways to do the same thing and both are valid.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
which is why I asked if we could get a feature to change between the two of them.
In both hammer and spark it is a Cartesian 3d-space, the only difference I noticed between the axes in hammer and in spark is their labels and colors. So unless there is some other difference I have not noticed, they both work in the same way.
Which direction the axes for a Cartesian 3d-space has doesn't really matter. As long as each axis is perpendicular to the others, it is still a 3d-space. Neither does the labels matter, it is just labels after all. The mathematics are still the same, each point in the space is defined by 3 numbers, which shows where on their respective axis a point is located.
I would also argue that the labels uwe choose for spark makes a lot of sense. Commonly, a vectors components is said in the order xyz, an angles components is pyr, while a colors component is rgb.
So they decided to associate the labels with the other labels in the order they are said in.
X | rotation around right-axis (pitch) | red
Y | rotation around up-axis (yaw) | green
Z | rotation around forward-axis (roll) | blue
EDIT:
You can also think of it like this. The axes for a Cartesian 2d-plane are commonly named x,y. If this plane is thought of as the screen, then to achieve a 3d-space, the z axis would be depth/forward of the camera.