Using a spotlight the function setDirectionToTarget
has an unexpected behaviour when first assigning a parent:
Note that without that line, the workspace illuminates just fine and the lamp follows the target.
However, explicitely setting it to the mesh position messes everything up.
I guess this is somewhat understandable in the sense that it just modifies its local coordinate direction, but is this really the intended behaviour?
Hmm I don’t see anything unexpected here. Since you move your sphere and you parent your light to the sphere, the direction should also be recalculated from your new parent.
I.E: If I set the sphere at zero position and parent my light to it, the direction is still correct/as expected.
However here, you are instructing to change the direction of light to be set to the parent (sphere) direction. Which means the new light direction is now the one of your parent.
I believe setDirectionToTarget is essentially ment for shadowing. May be this is not what you are looking for. In case, you should use ‘target’.
Yes you are right, I was just confused about which coordinate space should apply under which parenting condition. But nevertheless, for a couple of hours I am stuck with trying to bind a spotlight to a target.
What would be extremely helpful is a setParent() method for the lightsource. Unfortunately this does not seem to exist. Any idea, how to achieve something similar.
The lightsource is actually defined by some rays, which only exist in the world coordinate system.
Its easy to make to lightsource in the correct world position and direction, but I was unable so far to bind it without completely messing it up. I tried quaternions, world matix, rotations in the convention order orientations, their inverse etc. So far without much success.
From the programming perspective. I am given a mesh and a wold-coordinate direction (a ray) from which to illuminate it and I need to figure out how to place the spotlight. I also would like to parent it, since otherwise I have to keep track of all spotlights in a list and clean them, once the mesh gets deleted.
One coudl argue that a directional-Light may be better, but then I need probably a huge procedural texture to cover the whole scene, which sounds inefficient.
OK, I think I start to understand. Point is I’m not eng, rather a designer and art dir. Understand I like when things are ‘simple’ So, I guess I faced something similar before. You have meshes (eventually imported meshes) that the user can control. It might rotate, reposition or eventually rescale. And you want to add a light to it (because there’s no light attached to this mesh, else you would use ‘unlit’), correct? And you need a way to parent it to the mesh, because eventually the user will dispose of the mesh, yes? So, the solution I found for my similar use case might just not be the most ‘sexy’, but is simple and should work. It’s very basic. The idea is to create a new parent for the mesh and attach the light to this parent. Next you would just copy the position of box to the light. And then, in case of dispose, you would dispose the parent and all descendants.
Something like this PG below except of course, you wouldn’t do the change at runtime like in this quick and dirty PG, but on box transformation change/user input. Do you think this approach would work for you?
OK, playing some more with this, I finally pinned down the problem. Maybe this is a bug?
As you see the projection texture does NOT move with the rotating light-source but stays firm with the ground (i.e. the world coordinate system).
To me this is very odd as I expected the texture to be pinned to the projecting lightsource.
If you set “DoParent” to false in the script above, then the texture stays nicely fixed to the lightsource!
This is kind-of the opposite of what you whould expect. My suspicion: This is a bug. Maybe the texture offset (observable?) was detached from the lightsource coordinate system but it was forgotten to attach it to the parent coordinate system (or even back to the lightsource) after parenting?
Hmm, interesting Let’s just ask the experts here.
Expected, bug or potential feature request, I’m not too sure. There’s probably a logic behind this and we would also need to see what this change or adding would imply.
May be yours could kindly have a look at this? cc @Evgeni_Popov or @sebavan
Here is another problem, where you possibly know the answer:
As you see this slighty more complicated object has problems with the spotlight. This probably has to do with the assignment of the zero position in UV texture space. As noted in the program, if you change Math.PI/2 to -Math.PI/2 everything looks fine. Is there a way to somehow fix this issue differently? It seems a bit odd, that the behaviour of the spotlight depends on where something has its zero Texture position.
OMG, a csg Hum… I have no faen clue. Not sure anyone has. The CSG is kind of a blackhole. We faced many issues with it. Had another discussion just recently. All I can do is ping again @Evgeni_Popov but if you already found a work-around for your particular use case, I’m not sure we can propose anything better at this very moment.
Thanks a lot for fixing this!
Is there a way to include some of these PRs in my code development?
As for the CSG, I did not find a general way to avoid that problem. However, playing with options, rotations versus different sizes in the box etc., seemed to help. Yet the interesting question is, whether this works then from all sides in the final object. I have no idea, how texturing with CSG opjects (or in fact any arbitrary meshes) works. But if it is just via a bounding-box, then I suspect that there is still a bug somewhere, explaining the above problem.
Thanks for the info about the merging. Is the sound-pileup bug then already fixed? It seems like I am still haveing this problem.
By the way, I just found out, that loading a medium-sized (7Mb) hdr environment texture stalls my Pico-4 goggles to a halt which gives weired pixel artefacts during load. It looks like this is somehow achieved synchronously rather than asyncronously? With .env files I did not notice such a problem. But then this may also be because they are smaller.
Is CSG more strange than importing any mesh? I would think in the end a mesh is a mesh. Does the spotlight also have similar problems with imported meshes?