Stephen, you can see what you get for a Trident once its compiled here:
http://devluchadore.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/issues-converting-from-away3d-3-5-to-3-6/
That shows a screenshot of both Tridents in my actual CAD/CAM application so
you can see what I'm trying to achieve (the 3.5 Trident) versus what I am
getting (the 3.6 Trident).
So, if I understand this dot product issue, I should not be passing 0's, but
rather 0.001's in the upAxis vector? Instead of {0,0,-1} I need
{0.001,0.001,-1}? Since it was easy, I tried it. In fact I tried making
any 0 in sight 0.001. Didn't make a lick of difference.
I went back and looked at the eulers/rotation of the camera. It's quite
different in 3.5 vs 3.6, as it would have to be:
3.5:
46.83172 -2.4E-06 -44.9983
3.6
41.3751 -24.258 -70.003
Again, this sure looks like a 3.6 bug as I am feeding it exactly the same
parameters in both versions and getting a different answer.
I don't see how a forum will tell you any more than the mailing list. Just
because somebody viewed the post doesn't mean it was somebody on the team or
that knew anything. The real issue is it takes a lot of pushing to get
answers to questions. This is my second thread started on this issue before
anyone responded at all.
John, RE pure AS3, I don't know non-Flex, LOL. In any event, I don't think
there is much "Flexy" going on in that code other than the transparent layer
"hitArea". I debated whether to include it in the sample but did just in
case it might be the cause. It's there in the first place to deal with
another Away3D bug I could never get to the bottom of. My mouse events were
getting eaten if the mouse point touched any segment in any mesh.
Still need help figuring this out. Sure looks like a bug to me!
Cheers,
BW
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Stephen Hopkins <rentakni...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hard to say what you are trying to achieve/encountering since there is
> no compiled version, but the problem might be with the lookAt
> function. I and maybe a few others had trouble using the lookAt
> function.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/away3d-dev/browse_thread/thread/97f7f439a321873/99323699b3fecfe6?lnk=gst&q=simple+camera+problem#99323699b3fecfe6
>
> I just wanted the camera to look directly downwards, or along a
> global axis, but the camera would would not rotate for some reason
> unless I skewed the vector away from the the unit axis vectors. (i.e.,
> instead of looking at (0, 0, 0), I made it look at (0, 0, 0.001) ).
> Never found a fix to it or why it was happening. Such a bug did not
> occur in Away 3.5 as I had many demos/projects that did such a thing.
> This is why we need a forum. I would post a new issue, but I just hate
> the fact that there's no way of telling if they have been reviewed. I
> already have two outstanding issues that I don't know whether they
> will be solved or addressed, or just fixed in away3d 4.0
>
> On Apr 7, 8:36 am, Bob Warfield <b...@thewarfields.com> wrote:
> > I have attached source code for a real simple demo. It does nothing
> other
> > than show the Trident. If you compile it with 3.5 libraries, the Trident
> is
> > correct. If you compile with 3.6, the Trident is cockeyed.
> >
> > There are 2 changes required to switch between the libraries:
> >
> > - Comment or uncomment the import of Number3D.
> > - Comment or uncomment the routines at the top that say "3.5 Version" or
> > "3.6 Version".
> >
> > There's not an awful lot that changes between the two versions other than
> > whether I user Number3D or Vector3D yet the two Tridents are very
> > different. That doesn't seem right.
> >
> > Can somebody please help?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > BW
> >
> > GWAway3D.mxml
> > 1KViewDownload
> >
> > GWizCamDemo.as
> > 10KViewDownload
