# \[Processing\] Unfolding columns

**URL:** <https://discourse.processing.org/t/processing-unfolding-columns/610>\
**Category:** Gallery\
**Created:** [June 1, 2018, 10:47pm UTC](https://discourse.processing.org/t/processing-unfolding-columns/610 "2018-06-01T22:47:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![WakeMeAtThree](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/discourse.processing.org/wakemeatthree/32/38_2.png) [@WakeMeAtThree](https://discourse.processing.org/u/WakeMeAtThree)\
**Post date:** [June 4, 2018, 6:40pm UTC](https://discourse.processing.org/t/processing-unfolding-columns/610/4 "2018-06-04T18:40:09Z")

</div>

Thanks @dan850 + @jeremydouglass

> [@jeremydouglass](#):
>
> do you mean you are unfolding / flattening the point set onto a 3D plane in P3D?

Yes. They’re all 3D shapes. They’re essentially two lists of vertices: one that is flattened onto a 3D plane, and one that has depth. I’m using shear, rather than rotate, to show the depth of the unflattened shape. That way, the top side of the shapes maintain the 90 degree angles, and when combined with `ortho()` mode, keeps lines parallel in an oblique projection. What I meant by 2D to 3D is the perceptual sense, that one state looks like it’s a 2D pattern and another state looks like it’s 3Dimensional.

In the earlier iteration that preceded this, I used rotate to show the depth and the 2D portion looked like it’s 2D on a 3D plane (which I wasn’t happy with and tried to avoid later on):

[https://www.instagram.com/p/BjaGWNKlS5S/](https://www.instagram.com/p/BjaGWNKlS5S/)

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.processing.org/t/processing-unfolding-columns/610)._