Skip to main content

visualization - Graphics3D: Opacity limitations


Trying to make a better-looking globe model, I start off with something like this


enter image description here


To enhance the 3D effect, I want the lines further from the eye to be "grayer" than the lines closer to the eye, as if there were a little fog inside the sphere. I thought I might get there by replacing the great-circles with semi-transparent wafers, but it didn't work. It seems as though I hit some kind of internal limit on the number of semi-transparent objects I can create before they become opaque.



Here is the original code with polygonal great circles (minus the RGB-XYZ axes):


ClearAll[e, o, g, ϵ];
e[1] = {1, 0, 0}; e[2] = {0, 1, 0}; e[3] = {0, 0, 1};
o = {0, 0, 0}; g = 1.25; ϵ = 1/10000;
ClearAll[polycircle];
polycircle[n_: 360] :=
Line@Table[{Cos[2 π i/n], Sin[2 π i/n], 0}, {i, n + 1}];
ClearAll[globeGrid];
globeGrid[bands_: 6, figure_: polycircle[]] :=
{Table[

Scale[Translate[figure, Sin[(k π)/2] e[3]],
Cos[(k π)/2]]
, {k, -((bands - 1)/bands), (bands - 1)/bands, 1/bands}]
, Table[Rotate[Rotate[figure, π/2, e[1]], k π, e[3]]
, {k, 0, (bands - 1)/bands, 1/bands}]};
ClearAll[showFrames];
showFrames[figure_:polycircle[]] := Show[{
Graphics3D[{
Opacity[0.05], Sphere[], Opacity[1.0]
, globeGrid[6, figure]

}] }
, Axes -> True
, PlotRange -> {{-g, g}, {-g, g}, {-g, g}}
, ImageSize -> Large];
showFrames[]

To improve it, I replace the polycircles with partially transparent wafers, which are very thin cylinders at low opacity:


ClearAll[wafer];
wafer[opacity_: 1/24] :=
{RGBColor[1, 0.71, 0]

, Opacity[opacity]
, Cylinder[ϵ {-e[3], e[3]}]
, Opacity[1]};

The results were disappointing


showFrames[wafer[]]

enter image description here


EDIT: I tried a tube


polytorus[n_: 100] := Tube[polycircle[n], 0.01];

showFrames[polytorus[48]]

it's too slow to be interactive, but it has a better 3D effect. Still looking for a better answer.


enter image description here



Answer



How about something Image3D-based?


grid = First@
ParametricPlot3D[{Cos[u] Cos[v], Sin[u] Cos[v], Sin[v]}, {u, 0,
2 Pi}, {v, -Pi/2, Pi/2}, PlotStyle -> None];


Graphics3D[
{grid,
{Red, Thick, Line[1.2 {{-1, 0, 0}, {1, 0, 0}}]},
{Blue, Thick, Line[1.2 {{0, -1, 0}, {0, 1, 0}}]}, {Green, Thick,
Line[1.2 {{0, 0, -1}, {0, 0, 1}}]},
Raster3D[Array[
UnitStep[1 - Norm[{##}]] &, {100, 100,
100}, {{-1., 1.}, {-1., 1.}, {-1., 1.}}], {{-1, -1, -1}, {1, 1,
1}}, ColorFunction -> (GrayLevel[0.8, .03 #] &)]
},

Boxed -> False]

Mathematica graphics


Edit by halirutan


Let me point out some flaws and probably improve the quality a bit. Therefore, blame me for everything that follows, not Szabolcs.


First of all, fog is usually a global thing which means that the impact on the visibility really depends on the distance to the viewer. If the fog is only visible inside the sphere, then we have things like the top of wireframe which is crystal clear (and an eye catcher because lines meet there) while it is farther away from the camera than the front wire.


Therefore, we might improve the effect by making a foggy cube that is larger than the wireframe so that at least it looks like fog is everywhere from the camera viewpoint.


Another detail seems to be that the gradient with which view is degrading doesn't seem to be enough. Therefore, one could make a cube that has not a constant visual density, but a density that is getting larger in one direction. If we then view the wireframe from the correct viewpoint, it might increase the fog-effect.


Last point, I think fog looks better when it is white, not gray. If we combine all these points and make the wireframe thicker then I get something like the following (I'll append the code at the end):


enter image description here



There are some points left: Most importantly, I don't think it is appropriate to try to achieve something like this in the Mathematica front end. If you need high quality, then create your model and render it with Blender (or whatever renderer you prefer).


Finally, I could not get antialiasing working when I combined a Raster3D with a normal 3d graphics in Mathematica. It seems that this is not working with Raster3D or Image3D.


grid = First@
ParametricPlot3D[{Cos[u] Cos[v], Sin[u] Cos[v], Sin[v]}, {u, 0,
2 Pi}, {v, -Pi/2, Pi/2}, PlotStyle -> None,
MeshStyle ->
Directive[Thickness[0.005], RGBColor[0, 43/255, 18/85]]];

Graphics3D[{grid, RGBColor[44/51, 10/51, 47/255], Thickness[.01],
Line[1.2 {{-1, 0, 0}, {1, 0, 0}}], {RGBColor[38/255, 139/255,

14/17], Line[1.2 {{0, -1, 0}, {0, 1, 0}}]}, {RGBColor[133/255,
3/5, 0], Line[1.2 {{0, 0, -1}, {0, 0, 1}}]},
White,
Raster3D[
Array[#3 &, {100, 100,
100}, {{0, 1}, {0, 1}, {0, 1}}], {{-1, -2, -2}, {1, 2, 2}},
ColorFunction -> (GrayLevel[1, .05 #] &)]}, Boxed -> False,
ViewPoint -> {-3.15, -0.89, 0.84}, ViewAngle -> 0.175]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...