In Android, I have a Path object which I happen to know defines a closed path, and I need to figure out if a given point is contained within the path. What I was hoping for was something along the lines of
path.contains(int x, int y)
but that doesn't seem to exist.
The specific reason I'm looking for this is because I have a collection of shapes on screen defined as paths, and I want to figure out which one the user clicked on. If there is a better way to be approaching this such as using different UI elements rather than doing it "the hard way" myself, I'm open to suggestions.
I'm open to writing an algorithm myself if I have to, but that means different research I guess.
Here is what I did and it seems to work:
RectF rectF = new RectF();
path.computeBounds(rectF, true);
region = new Region();
region.setPath(path, new Region((int) rectF.left, (int) rectF.top, (int) rectF.right, (int) rectF.bottom));
Now you can use the region.contains(x,y) method.
Point point = new Point();
mapView.getProjection().toPixels(geoPoint, point);
if (region.contains(point.x, point.y)) {
// Within the path.
}
** Update on 6/7/2010 **
The region.setPath method will cause my app to crash (no warning message) if the rectF is too large. Here is my solution:
// Get the screen rect. If this intersects with the path's rect
// then lets display this zone. The rectF will become the
// intersection of the two rects. This will decrease the size therefor no more crashes.
Rect drawableRect = new Rect();
mapView.getDrawingRect(drawableRect);
if (rectF.intersects(drawableRect.left, drawableRect.top, drawableRect.right, drawableRect.bottom)) {
// ... Display Zone.
}
The android.graphics.Path class doesn't have such a method. The Canvas class does have a clipping region that can be set to a path, there is no way to test it against a point. You might try Canvas.quickReject, testing against a single point rectangle (or a 1x1 Rect). I don't know if that would really check against the path or just the enclosing rectangle, though.
The Region class clearly only keeps track of the containing rectangle.
You might consider drawing each of your regions into an 8-bit alpha layer Bitmap with each Path filled in it's own 'color' value (make sure anti-aliasing is turned off in your Paint). This creates kind of a mask for each path filled with an index to the path that filled it. Then you could just use the pixel value as an index into your list of paths.
Bitmap lookup = Bitmap.createBitmap(width, height, Bitmap.Config.ALPHA_8);
//do this so that regions outside any path have a default
//path index of 255
lookup.eraseColor(0xFF000000);
Canvas canvas = new Canvas(lookup);
Paint paint = new Paint();
//these are defaults, you only need them if reusing a Paint
paint.setAntiAlias(false);
paint.setStyle(Paint.Style.FILL);
for(int i=0;i<paths.size();i++)
{
paint.setColor(i<<24); // use only alpha value for color 0xXX000000
canvas.drawPath(paths.get(i), paint);
}
Then look up points,
int pathIndex = lookup.getPixel(x, y);
pathIndex >>>= 24;
Be sure to check for 255 (no path) if there are unfilled points.
WebKit's SkiaUtils has a C++ work-around for Randy Findley's bug:
bool SkPathContainsPoint(SkPath* originalPath, const FloatPoint& point, SkPath::FillType ft)
{
SkRegion rgn;
SkRegion clip;
SkPath::FillType originalFillType = originalPath->getFillType();
const SkPath* path = originalPath;
SkPath scaledPath;
int scale = 1;
SkRect bounds = originalPath->getBounds();
// We can immediately return false if the point is outside the bounding rect
if (!bounds.contains(SkFloatToScalar(point.x()), SkFloatToScalar(point.y())))
return false;
originalPath->setFillType(ft);
// Skia has trouble with coordinates close to the max signed 16-bit values
// If we have those, we need to scale.
//
// TODO: remove this code once Skia is patched to work properly with large
// values
const SkScalar kMaxCoordinate = SkIntToScalar(1<<15);
SkScalar biggestCoord = std::max(std::max(std::max(bounds.fRight, bounds.fBottom), -bounds.fLeft), -bounds.fTop);
if (biggestCoord > kMaxCoordinate) {
scale = SkScalarCeil(SkScalarDiv(biggestCoord, kMaxCoordinate));
SkMatrix m;
m.setScale(SkScalarInvert(SkIntToScalar(scale)), SkScalarInvert(SkIntToScalar(scale)));
originalPath->transform(m, &scaledPath);
path = &scaledPath;
}
int x = static_cast<int>(floorf(point.x() / scale));
int y = static_cast<int>(floorf(point.y() / scale));
clip.setRect(x, y, x + 1, y + 1);
bool contains = rgn.setPath(*path, clip);
originalPath->setFillType(originalFillType);
return contains;
}
I know I'm a bit late to the party, but I would solve this problem by thinking about it like determining whether or not a point is in a polygon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_in_polygon
The math computes more slowly when you're looking at Bezier splines instead of line segments, but drawing a ray from the point still works.
For completeness, I want to make a couple notes here:
As of API 19, there is an intersection operation for Paths. You could create a very small square path around your test point, intersect it with the Path, and see if the result is empty or not.
You can convert Paths to Regions and do a contains() operation. However Regions work in integer coordinates, and I think they use transformed (pixel) coordinates, so you'll have to work with that. I also suspect that the conversion process is computationally intensive.
The edge-crossing algorithm that Hans posted is good and quick, but you have to be very careful for certain corner cases such as when the ray passes directly through a vertex, or intersects a horizontal edge, or when round-off error is a problem, which it always is.
The winding number method is pretty much fool proof, but involves a lot of trig and is computationally expensive.
This paper by Dan Sunday gives a hybrid algorithm that's as accurate as the winding number but as computationally simple as the ray-casting algorithm. It blew me away how elegant it was.
See https://stackoverflow.com/a/33974251/338479 for my code which will do point-in-path calculation for a path consisting of line segments, arcs, and circles.
Related
I need to draw line graph with lakes of points in canvas rendering. I used following ways to optimize the performance,
Avoided to create object in onDraw method.
Using drawLines method in canvas rather than using path.moveTo and path.lineTo, since, my thought is path is always render using CPU not GPU.
Removed line anti-alias.
Not set alpha value for line color.
Set HardwareAcceleration to true.
Using some sampling algorithms.
This is what i actually doing after read some performance tips to get good performance, If you know to make even better please suggest to me.
Instead of drawLine you can use drawRect. And use SurfaceView. (Quite honestly, I don't like SurfaceView for some limitations it has and organise back buffers myself, but most of developers prefer it).
This is what comes to my mind (without testing and thinking much).
Suppose you have a table grpData[] of float data, each in range 0f to 1f. You also have a table of colours (not colour resource Ids) grpColours.
Them your code will look smth like this:
private Paint p = new Paint();
#Override
public void onDraw(Canvas canvas) {
super.onDraw(canvas); // Draws background
int width = getWidth();
int height = getHeight();
int count = grpData.length;
float xStep = (float) width / count;
float x=0f;
for (int i=0; i<count, i++) {
float nextX = x+xStep;
p.setColor(grpColours[i]);
canvas.drawRect(x, (1f-grpData[i])*height, nextX, height, p);
x = nextX;
}
}
PS. I am not sure that hardware acceleration really helps. On the contrary it may cause problems with some cheap devices.
I would like to be able to know the total area covered by a region (e.g. a double integral over this said area).
I cannot find any method for that, and I wonder will I have to go pixel-by-pixel.
Thanks in advance!
You should be able to use a RegionIterator and sum the areas of the rectangles returned.
Reasoning: The Andriod docs imply that when boolean ops are done on regions, the result region is a new set of non-overlapping rectangles with the desired union. In other words, A - B, where A and B are rectangles, may produce 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 rectangles as a result.
I have not tested, but the source at the Android xRef site shows that a validated region consists of rectangles with no overlaps.
It seems, i have the same problem like your problem.
I'm not sure, if it is a "real" solution. But i post my code. The values looks ok.
private void calculateArea(Region region) {
RegionIterator regionIterator = new RegionIterator(region);
int size = 0; // amount of Rects
float area = 0; // units of area
Rect tmpRect= new Rect();
while (regionIterator.next(tmpRect)) {
size++;
area += tmpRect.width() * tmpRect.height();
}
log.d("Rect amount=" + size);
log.d("Area Size / units of area=" + area);
}
}
My Problem is: I want to get the area size of some drawn pathes. To recognize touches on the pathes i added a Region too.
I have a java code for SVG drawing. It processes transforms including rotate, and does this very well, as far as I can see in numerous test pictures compared against their rendering in Chrome. Next what I need is to get actual object location, which is in many images declared via transforms. So I decided just to read X and Y from Matrix used for drawing. Unfortunately I get incorrect values for rotate transform, that is they do not correspond to real object location in the image.
The stripped down code looks like this:
Matrix matrix = new Matrix();
float cx = 1000; // suppose this is an object X coordinate
float cy = 300; // this is its Y coordinate
float angle = -90; // rotate counterclockwise, got from "rotate(-90, 1000, 300)"
// shift to -X,-Y, so object is in the center
matrix.postTranslate(-cx, -cy);
// rotate actually
matrix.postRotate(angle);
// shift back
matrix.postTranslate(cx, cy);
// debug goes here
float[] values = new float[9];
matrix.getValues(values);
Log.v("HELLO", values[Matrix.MTRANS_X] + " " + values[Matrix.MTRANS_Y]);
The log outputs the values 700 and 1300 respectively. I'd expect 0 and 0, because I see the object rotated inplace in my image (that is there is no any movement), and postTranslate calls should compensate each other. Of course, I see how these values are formed from 1000 and 300, but don't understand why. Once again, I point out that the matrix with these strange values is used for actual object drawing, and it looks correct. Could someone explain what happens here? Am I missing something? So far I have only one solution of my problem: just do not try to obtain position from rotate, do it only for explicit matrix and translate transforms. But this approach lacks generality, and anyway I thought matrix should have reasonable values (including offsets) for any transformation type.
The answer is that the matrix is an operator for space transformation, and should not be used for direct extraction of object position. Instead, one should get initial object coordinates, as specified in x and y attributes of an SVG tag, and apply the matrix on them:
float[] src = new float[2];
src[0] = cx;
src[1] = cy;
matrix.mapPoints(src);
After this we get proper location values in x and y variables.
I am developing an application which uses OpenGL for rendering of the images.
Now I just want to determine the touch event on the opengl sphere object which I have drwn.
Here i draw 4 object on the screen. now how should I come to know that which object has been
touched. I have used onTouchEvent() method. But It gives me only x & y co-ordinates but my
object is drawn in 3D.
please help since I am new to OpenGL.
Best Regards,
~Anup
t Google IO there was a session on how OpenGL was used for Google Body on Android. The selecting of body parts was done by rendering each of them with a solid color into a hidden buffer, then based on the color that was on the touch x,y the corresponding object could be found. For performance purposes, only a small cropped area of 20x20 pixels around the touch point was rendered that way.
Both approach (1. hidden color buffer and 2. intersection test) has its own merit.
1. Hidden color buffer: pixel read-out is a very slow operation.
Certainly an overkill for a simple ray-sphere intersection test.
Ray-sphere intersection test: this is not that difficult.
Here is a simplified version of an implementation in Ogre3d.
std::pair<bool, m_real> Ray::intersects(const Sphere& sphere) const
{
const Ray& ray=*this;
const vector3& raydir = ray.direction();
// Adjust ray origin relative to sphere center
const vector3& rayorig = ray.origin() - sphere.center;
m_real radius = sphere.radius;
// Mmm, quadratics
// Build coeffs which can be used with std quadratic solver
// ie t = (-b +/- sqrt(b*b + 4ac)) / 2a
m_real a = raydir%raydir;
m_real b = 2 * rayorig%raydir;
m_real c = rayorig%rayorig - radius*radius;
// Calc determinant
m_real d = (b*b) - (4 * a * c);
if (d < 0)
{
// No intersection
return std::pair<bool, m_real>(false, 0);
}
else
{
// BTW, if d=0 there is one intersection, if d > 0 there are 2
// But we only want the closest one, so that's ok, just use the
// '-' version of the solver
m_real t = ( -b - sqrt(d) ) / (2 * a);
if (t < 0)
t = ( -b + sqrt(d) ) / (2 * a);
return std::pair<bool, m_real>(true, t);
}
}
Probably, a ray that corresponds to cursor position also needs to be calculated. Again you can refer to Ogre3d's source code: search for getCameraToViewportRay. Basically, you need the view and projection matrix to calculate a Ray (a 3D position and a 3D direction) from 2D position.
In my project, the solution I chose was:
Unproject your 2D screen coordinates to a virtual 3D line going through your scene.
Detect possible intersections of that line and your scene objects.
This is quite a complex tast.
I have only done this in Direct3D rather than OpenGL ES, but these are the steps:
Find your modelview and projection matrices. It seems that OpenGL ES has removed the ability to retrieve the matrices set by gluProject() etc. But you can use android.opengl.Matrix member functions to create these matrices instead, then set with glLoadMatrix().
Call gluUnproject() twice, once with winZ=0, then with winZ=1. Pass the matrices you calculated earlier.
This will output a 3d position from each call. This pair of positions define a ray in OpenGL "world space".
Perform a ray - sphere intersection test on each of your spheres in order. (Closest to camera first, otherwise you may select a sphere that is hidden behind another.) If you detect an intersection, you've touched the sphere.
for find touch point is inside circle or not..
public boolean checkInsideCircle(float x,float y, float centerX,float centerY, float Radius)
{
if(((x - centerX)*(x - centerX))+((y - centerY)*(y - centerY)) < (Radius*Radius))
return true;
else
return false;
}
where
1) centerX,centerY are center point of circle.
2) Radius is radius of circle.
3) x,y point of touch..
How do I get the current translate position from a Canvas? I am trying to draw stuff where my coordinates are a mix of relative (to each other) and absolute (to canvas).
Lets say I want to do
canvas.translate(x1, y1);
canvas.drawSomething(0, 0); // will show up at (x1, y1), all good
// now i want to draw a point at x2,y2
canvas.translate(x2, y2);
canvas.drawSomething(0, 0); // will show up at (x1+x2, y1+y2)
// i could do
canvas.drawSomething(-x1, -y1);
// but i don't always know those coords
This works but is dirty:
private static Point getCurrentTranslate(Canvas canvas) {
float [] pos = new float [2];
canvas.getMatrix().mapPoints(pos);
return new Point((int)pos[0], (int)pos[1]);
}
...
Point p = getCurrentTranslate(canvas);
canvas.drawSomething(-p.x, -p.y);
The canvas has a getMatrix method, it has a setTranslate but no getTranslate. I don't want to use canvas.save() and canvas.restore() because the way I'm drawing things it's a little tricky (and probably messy ...)
Is there a cleaner way to get these current coordinates?
You need to reset the transformation matrix first. I'm not an android developer, looking at the android canvas docs, there is no reset matrix, but there is a setMatrix(android.graphics.Matrix). It says if the given matrix is null it will set the current matrix to the identity matrix, which is what you want. So I think you can reset your position (and scale and skew) with:
canvas.setMatrix(null);
It would also be possible to get the current translation through getMatrix. There is a mapVectors() method you could use for matrices to see where the point [0,0] would be mapped to, this would be your translation. But in your case I think resetting the matrix is best.