Skip to main content
added 416 characters in body
Source Link

I always thought that relative info gives us information about the object relative to the object's local coordinate system. And by this logic, if both objects have Y rotation 0, then relative rotation should give 0 in Y, as well. enter image description here enter image description here

Then how to understand this?

enter image description here

How is relative info actually converted from original info, if not by subtraction?

Here is file-example:Test

Ok, as I see, without explaining the global problem it is not very clear what I need. I'm trying to pull information about an object (loc,rot) (hereafter gradient) through an attribute from another object (hereafter controller). Obviously, the relative info of the gradient will be considered for the controller, not for the main object. So I pass the original info through the attribute, and then I need to somehow calculate the relative for the main object inside its GN. To get the same data that the object info node gives. Loc, I was already able to convert from original to relative. (Maybe I'm doing a total crap and it could be much simpler, but at least the values are the same). And the ultimate goal in general is to replicate the "Texture coordinate" Object output in GN.

Here is a new example file: Test 2

UPD.

Okay, apparently it is impossible or very difficult to do exactly what I asked. But it is possible to calculate relative rotation of one object to another without using relative object info inside one of the objects. Actually this post is a subpost of How to transfer relative info with attribute? so the answer will be there.

I always thought that relative info gives us information about the object relative to the object's local coordinate system. And by this logic, if both objects have Y rotation 0, then relative rotation should give 0 in Y, as well. enter image description here enter image description here

Then how to understand this?

enter image description here

How is relative info actually converted from original info, if not by subtraction?

Here is file-example:Test

Ok, as I see, without explaining the global problem it is not very clear what I need. I'm trying to pull information about an object (loc,rot) (hereafter gradient) through an attribute from another object (hereafter controller). Obviously, the relative info of the gradient will be considered for the controller, not for the main object. So I pass the original info through the attribute, and then I need to somehow calculate the relative for the main object inside its GN. To get the same data that the object info node gives. Loc, I was already able to convert from original to relative. (Maybe I'm doing a total crap and it could be much simpler, but at least the values are the same). And the ultimate goal in general is to replicate the "Texture coordinate" Object output in GN.

Here is a new example file: Test 2

I always thought that relative info gives us information about the object relative to the object's local coordinate system. And by this logic, if both objects have Y rotation 0, then relative rotation should give 0 in Y, as well. enter image description here enter image description here

Then how to understand this?

enter image description here

How is relative info actually converted from original info, if not by subtraction?

Here is file-example:Test

Ok, as I see, without explaining the global problem it is not very clear what I need. I'm trying to pull information about an object (loc,rot) (hereafter gradient) through an attribute from another object (hereafter controller). Obviously, the relative info of the gradient will be considered for the controller, not for the main object. So I pass the original info through the attribute, and then I need to somehow calculate the relative for the main object inside its GN. To get the same data that the object info node gives. Loc, I was already able to convert from original to relative. (Maybe I'm doing a total crap and it could be much simpler, but at least the values are the same). And the ultimate goal in general is to replicate the "Texture coordinate" Object output in GN.

Here is a new example file: Test 2

UPD.

Okay, apparently it is impossible or very difficult to do exactly what I asked. But it is possible to calculate relative rotation of one object to another without using relative object info inside one of the objects. Actually this post is a subpost of How to transfer relative info with attribute? so the answer will be there.

Mod Moved Comments To Chat
edited title
Link

What info does How to calculate relative rotation output givefrom original?

Post Reopened by Duarte Farrajota Ramos
added 923 characters in body
Added to review
Source Link

I always thought that relative info gives us information about the object relative to the object's local coordinate system. And by this logic, if both objects have Y rotation 0, then relative rotation should give 0 in Y, as well. enter image description here enter image description here

Then how to understand this?

enter image description here

How is relative info actually converted from original info, if not by subtraction?

Here is file-example:Test

Ok, as I see, without explaining the global problem it is not very clear what I need. I'm trying to pull information about an object (loc,rot) (hereafter gradient) through an attribute from another object (hereafter controller). Obviously, the relative info of the gradient will be considered for the controller, not for the main object. So I pass the original info through the attribute, and then I need to somehow calculate the relative for the main object inside its GN. To get the same data that the object info node gives. Loc, I was already able to convert from original to relative. (Maybe I'm doing a total crap and it could be much simpler, but at least the values are the same). And the ultimate goal in general is to replicate the "Texture coordinate" Object output in GN.

Here is a new example file: Test 2

I always thought that relative info gives us information about the object relative to the object's local coordinate system. And by this logic, if both objects have Y rotation 0, then relative rotation should give 0 in Y, as well. enter image description here enter image description here

Then how to understand this?

enter image description here

How is relative info actually converted from original info, if not by subtraction?

Here is file-example:Test

I always thought that relative info gives us information about the object relative to the object's local coordinate system. And by this logic, if both objects have Y rotation 0, then relative rotation should give 0 in Y, as well. enter image description here enter image description here

Then how to understand this?

enter image description here

How is relative info actually converted from original info, if not by subtraction?

Here is file-example:Test

Ok, as I see, without explaining the global problem it is not very clear what I need. I'm trying to pull information about an object (loc,rot) (hereafter gradient) through an attribute from another object (hereafter controller). Obviously, the relative info of the gradient will be considered for the controller, not for the main object. So I pass the original info through the attribute, and then I need to somehow calculate the relative for the main object inside its GN. To get the same data that the object info node gives. Loc, I was already able to convert from original to relative. (Maybe I'm doing a total crap and it could be much simpler, but at least the values are the same). And the ultimate goal in general is to replicate the "Texture coordinate" Object output in GN.

Here is a new example file: Test 2

Post Closed as "Needs details or clarity" by quellenform
added 125 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 9 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
Source Link
Loading