Paint.NET

Welcome to the Paint.NET forum!
It is currently Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:43 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Compare pixels for similarity to source pixel.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:40 pm
Posts: 1267
Location: Middle Tennessee
Pixels that don't exist should simply not be a part of the signal. If only I had a napkin to draw a poor 3D graph of a signal.. Oh, wait,

"Song of Solomon" by Animals as Leaders spectrogram:
Image

The places of no signal would have no influence in the calculation of the waveform, were we to calculate the waveform, right?

I dunno.

_________________
Image
Kitteh all growed up :_(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Compare pixels for similarity to source pixel.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:35 am 
Offline
Paint.NET Lead Developer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 8883
Location: Kirkland, WA
I don't know :)

_________________
The Paint.NET Blog: http://blog.getpaint.net/
Donations are always appreciated! http://www.getpaint.net/donate.html
Paint.NET Search Engine: http://searchpaint.net

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Compare pixels for similarity to source pixel.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:40 pm
Posts: 1267
Location: Middle Tennessee
But what I do know is I found a math library from 2002 in C# with a nice little FFT algorithm in there...

_________________
Image
Kitteh all growed up :_(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Compare pixels for similarity to source pixel.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:26 pm
Posts: 47
Illnab1024: The dark values in the spectrogram correspond to a low-amplitude coefficient in a frequency-domain representation of a certain block (maybe window?) of the original (time-domain) signal. Precise reconstruction of the waveform requires all of the coefficients. If those values aren't explicitly defined, we might implicitly assume that they're zero... but that would be rather similar to an ubiquitous form of lossless compression :(

Rick: Thanks for the tip! The BlendColorsWFP method is close to what I'm looking for.

barkbark00: You've identified a very important issue here: how can we run a filter on points near the boundary of the defined portion of a signal which isn't defined everywhere? My Eigen Blur effect essentially makes up values beyond the edge of the image. I treat the image as a periodic function and continue it a little ways past the bounds so that I can keep the filter well-behaved. Apparently this is a common thing to do. Some other effects that I've seen assume that those values are zero or use a nearby value from the image. Some avoid handling pixels near the boundary altogether. Others modify the filter near the edges to avoid having to make up values, as you propose. It's hard to read, but I think that Rick's Gaussian Blur does this. Each of these different approaches probably makes sense in at least one interpretation :D

Edit: Found a better link for link #2.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ask Jeeves [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Hosted by Forumer & phpBB

Get your Forumer™ today!

Adding a forum to your website is a great way to get return visitors.

» Get your own Free Forum!

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Report Abuse

Copyright © 2003-2009 Forumer. All Rights Reserved. | Copyright © paint.NET