Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Example threejs terrain #3429

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Dec 1, 2023
Merged

Conversation

MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor

@MichaelLangbein MichaelLangbein commented Nov 30, 2023

Launch Checklist

  • Confirm your changes do not include backports from Mapbox projects (unless with compliant license) - if you are not sure about this, please ask!
  • Briefly describe the changes in this PR.
  • Link to related issues.
  • N/A Include before/after visuals or gifs if this PR includes visual changes.
  • N/A Write tests for all new functionality.
  • N/A Document any changes to public APIs.
  • N/A Post benchmark scores.
  • Add an entry to CHANGELOG.md under the ## main section.

Description

  • Adds documentation: new example of using a three.js CustomLayer together with maplibre's terrain.
  • Relates to this issue.
  • Places a threejs scene on terrain by accounting for maplibre per default displaying all objects at the height of center - even if the objects themselves are located at a point on the terrain that lies higher or lower than center.
  • It does so by simply translating the scene by sceneElevation - terrainCenterElevation.

Needs some review:

  1. Is the sceneElevation - terrainCenterElevation approach suggested here really idiomatic?
  2. Couldn't run generate-images as described here - is the provided image sufficient?

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Nov 30, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (b7b86c1) 75.60% compared to head (61adff5) 75.58%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
src/source/load_tilejson.ts 85.71% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3429      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.60%   75.58%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         242      242              
  Lines       19199    19188      -11     
  Branches     4257     4254       -3     
==========================================
- Hits        14515    14503      -12     
- Misses       4684     4685       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Member

@HarelM HarelM left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall this looks good, I'm not familiar with three to fully understand this, but I think it's OK.

@neodescis
Copy link
Collaborator

The three.js part itself looks good. There is a lot more math here than in the old debug page I posted in the issue thread, but I do not know enough about it to know if this is all needed. @MichaelLangbein, do you think you could you take a look at the old debug page and help us understand the differences?

@MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor Author

The three.js part itself looks good. There is a lot more math here than in the old debug page I posted in the issue thread, but I do not know enough about it to know if this is all needed. @MichaelLangbein, do you think you could you take a look at the old debug page and help us understand the differences?

Sure thing, will do! I'll add some explaining comments some time after tonight. I can already say that there's not much change relative to the Debug-Page.

  • I've attempted to make things a little simpler by removing a little of the rotation logic.
  • I'm using a scene with two models in it to prove that the process works with objects at different elevations.
  • That helper function calculateDistanceMercatorToMeters is just a quick-and-dirty way to get distances in threejs-scene coordinates from Mercator coordinates. It won't work if objects are far apart, which I will add as a comment.

The whole rest of the matrix math stems from the existing example in the docs, but I'll add some comments there, too.

@MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've just stumbled across this helpful discussion on issue 1318.
But I wanted to make sure that my mental model was still correct. I believe that the graphic posted here is no longer correct. What the graphic calls altitude now is called cameraToCenterDistance (which is given in pixels). altitude today means the height of the camera over sea-level (given in meters). Am I correct?

@HarelM
Copy link
Member

HarelM commented Dec 1, 2023

Not sure I know how to answer this question, can you clarify it a bit?

@MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not sure I know how to answer this question, can you clarify it a bit?

This is my understanding of how the variables in map.projection are to be interpreted - it differs a little bit from the graphic shown here

drawing

@MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor Author

MichaelLangbein commented Dec 1, 2023

Alright, I've switched the code to use map.queryTerrainElevation, which did save me a few lines of calculations.
I've also added a bunch of comments explaining:

  • the reasoning behind how the threejs-scene has been placed and transformed (which I think is now a little bit nicer than on my first attempt, because I'm now transforming the whole scene instead of each object individually)
  • a few words about what queryTerrainElevation actually returns, particularly that it already returns the difference with the elevation of center.

@MichaelLangbein MichaelLangbein marked this pull request as ready for review December 1, 2023 09:26
@MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hmm, sometimes the unit tests don't seem to pass. I haven't changed anything about maplibre itself - is this an actual error or just a CI issue?

@HarelM HarelM merged commit a9ffa17 into maplibre:main Dec 1, 2023
14 checks passed
@MichaelLangbein
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for merging! I guess this also closes issue 3427.

@neodescis
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you @MichaelLangbein!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants