Nope. I have obj files. Your hypothesis is correct. I have attached one of them. Your script works just fine (is there an easy way to save this image?).
As a side note: I do collect point clouds using V-REP, and I can generate pointclouds (pcd) using pcl - but I want to work with the obj mesh files because the clouds are too sparse. I probably could have explained myself better, point taken. I will aim to try harder next time, I feel horrid when I am asking basic questions and on top of that writing an essay. The only other person I know who uses the term interwebz is Richard on Fast and Loud - I am an avid supporter. On Monday, 23 November 2015 13:41:40 UTC+2, Simon Danisch wrote: > > I'm not sure what you mean by virtual objects. Obj is in the context of 3D > objects is usually the wavefront > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavefront_.obj_file> format. > If you have an object database with *.obj's in it, the probability is very > high, that you don't have pointclouds whatsoever. > You can try this, to confirm my hypothesis: > > using GLVisualize, FileIO > obj = load("file.obj") > w,r = glscreen() > view(visualize(obj)) > r() > > Or just download any obj viewer from the interwebzz and look at that > thing. > If you have nice smooth surfaces, you're getting it all wrong with the > pointclouds and ray tracing. > I could give you some hacky way of extracting depth images with > GLVisualize, if that's what you're after. > In that case, just try the example above and if that works, open an issue > at GLVisualize that you want depth images. Then we can take it from there. > > > If by any chance you DO have pointclouds stored in an obj file, things are > more complicated since you then need to approximate the surface of that > cloud. > Still, raytracing wouldn't be your friend ;) If you have infinitely small > points, there is no magic that lets a ray hit these points any better then > some other visualization algorithm. > Even if it's really dense, you still have infinitely small points. You can > treat the points as particles, to give them some "body" that you can > see, but then it's not really a surface anymore. > > Just google for pointcloud surface approximation and see where that gets > you. > > I'm guessing here, that you have some sensor that outputs depth images and > you want to recognize objects in these depth images. > To train your depth image classifier, you need depth images from a lot of > perspectives from a lot of random 3D objects, which is why you searched for > a 3D object database, which got you to the obj files of random 3D objects. > > It'd have been a lot easier, if you just stated this in your problem > description, probably even with links to the obj database. > > Best, > Simon > > Am Freitag, 20. November 2015 16:18:46 UTC+1 schrieb kleinsplash: >> >> I was wondering if someone could help me out with a decision/offer an >> opinion: >> >> I need a ray tracer that deals with complex geometry (a fast ray tracer >> that can create 1000's of point clouds in minimal time) >> Python has methods: http://pyopengl.sourceforge.net/ that I could get to >> grips with. But I want to stick with Julia. >> >> I have found these resources: >> https://github.com/JuliaGL/ModernGL.jl - not sure if this has a ray >> tracing option >> http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~keenan/Projects/QuaternionJulia/ - looks >> crazy complicated >> >> https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/master/test/perf/kernel/raytracer.jl >> - looks like only handles simple geometry >> >> Could someone point me in the right direction? >> >> >> >
42_wineglass_final-29-Oct-2015-10-38-19.obj
Description: Binary data
