123
-=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- (c) WidthPadding Industries 1987 0|613|0 -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=-
Socoder -> On Topic -> Visual Object tracking

Posted : Sunday, 10 January 2010, 10:18
dna

When a primary object is in looking in a direction and a secondary object moves into its view and if the primary object is tracking the object visually then is the primary objects tracking of the secondary object considered a form of parallax?

-=-=-
DNA
Posted : Sunday, 10 January 2010, 13:31
Nolan
A form of parallax? What does this post even mean?

-=-=-
nolandc.com
Posted : Tuesday, 12 January 2010, 10:15
dna
Yes Tikihead.

The math I used was wrong but the motion that am trying to get, although it is visually the same, the viewer does not move.

I trying to move an image on a plane for the viewer.

-=-=-
DNA