I wrote:
> 2. Since you know that:
>
> Transform3D theTransform = new Transform3D();
> theTransform.set( 1 / aScale[ 0 ], theTranslationVector );
> theTransformGroup_.setTransform( theTransform );
>
> works for fixing the location and size, you might try:
>
> Transform3D theTransform = new Transform3D();
> theTransform.set( 1 / aScale[ 0 ], theTranslationVector );
> Transform3D scale = new Transform3D();
> scale.set( 1 / aScale[ 0 ] );
> theTransform.mul(scale);
> theTransformGroup_.setTransform( theTransform );
Clearly this should not re-apply the scale, but apply the
inverse of the translation in 'scale'. That is:
Transform3D theTransform = new Transform3D();
theTransform.set( 1 / aScale[ 0 ], theTranslationVector );
Transform3D translate = new Transform3D();
Vector3d inverse = new Vector3d();
inverse.x = -theTranslationVector.x;
inverse.y = -theTranslationVector.y;
inverse.z = -theTranslationVector.z;
translate.set( inverse );
theTransform.mul(translate);
theTransformGroup_.setTransform( theTransform );
> I may have some detail wrong, like the order of multiplying
> matrices, but with a few experiments you may get it. When I
> write such transform matrix code, I always have to experiment
> to get it right.
And of course, you can probably accomplish the same thing
with your original code and experimenting with arithmetic
operations on the x, y and z values in theTranslationVector.
Good luck,
Bill
----------------------------------------------------------
Bill Hibbard, SSEC, 1225 W. Dayton St., Madison, WI 53706
hibbard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 608-263-4427 fax: 608-263-6738
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/vis.html
