nitin@ur-laser.uucp (Nitin Sampat) (08/27/85)
So what happened to the 25-30 people who voted "yes" for the IP group?
If you are realy interested in IP how come no one is posting any articles
..or atleast nowhere proportional to the number that was interested.
Lets have some postings on what you are doing....what say ?
{seismo,allegra}!rochester!ur-laser!nitin.uucp
dean@aoa.UUCP (Dean Wormell) (08/28/85)
In article <301@ur-laser.uucp> nitin@ur-laser.uucp (Nitin Sampat) writes: >So what happened to the 25-30 people who voted "yes" for the IP group? > > {seismo,allegra}!rochester!ur-laser!nitin.uucp I have sent follow-up articles, but at that time our news was not posting properly... In hopes of not being too late, here is a response to your article dated July 12, 1985: > That brings up an > intersting question..at what point do you start separating computer > graphics from a field called image processing ? > > Image processing in a strict sense can be defined as the manipulation > and analysis of images with the help of a computer to obtain a > desired result ? This is partially true, much of image processing involves scene analysis. Scene analysis is usally done with high speed pre-processors (for real time applications) or as you state with slower host computer for post- processing of an aquired image(s). Another image processing techniques frequently used incorporate an optical pre-processor, either active or passive (i.e. light values/modulators and/or spectral, spatial filters...). > Is it reasonable to say, then, that graphics > deals only with manipulation while IP involves more analysis ? I feel graphics deals more with the creation of images. IP also includes image aquisition (image intensifiers, vidicons, detetector arrays, video signal processing and digitization). > Or is computer graphics a branch of image processing ? Computer graphics is often used to display aquired and processed images. > Even eyeglasses do some image processing i.e. they manipulate > images to obtain a specific result. Let's create net.optics :-). > For all those wanting an Image processing group, let us first decide > what image processing really means...is it just one of those technical > jargons that we choose because it sounds "hi-tech", or are we going after > something specific ??? > > nitin@ur-laser.uucp > {seismo,allegra}!rochester!ur-laser!nitin To sum up, I feel there is a hardware difference between IP and CG. Most postings to .graphics relate to graphic terminals, graphic software, and printer/plotters. I do agree there should be some honest discussion/interest related to image aquisition, pre/post-processing, analog video signal processing, (not VCR, Beta, etc.) vision systems and real-time scene analysis to warrant the creation of net.image. ** These opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer ** Dean Wormell ...!{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!aoa!dean -- Dean Wormell ...!{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!aoa!dean
dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (08/30/85)
A common way of dividing up the world of computers and pictures is: computer graphics: producing an image from numbers. Examples: the picture may symbolically display something of interest about the numbers, or the numbers mathematically describe an image that is to be created. image analysis: obtaining some sort of numbers from an image. The image is usually obtained from the "real world", and the task at hand is to obtain information from it - how many blood cells are on the slide, whether anything has moved since the previous frame, how many acres of corn are in this picture? image processing: processing an image in some way to produce another image. Described this way, all three fields are disjoint. The image analysis and image processing people have a lot in common when it comes to obtaining and processing their input images.
meier@srcsip.UUCP (Christopher M. Meier) (09/02/85)
>>So what happened to the 25-30 people who voted "yes" for the IP group? >> >> {seismo,allegra}!rochester!ur-laser!nitin.uucp > >To sum up, I feel there is a hardware difference between IP and CG. >Most postings to .graphics relate to graphic terminals, graphic >software, and printer/plotters. I do agree there should be some >honest discussion/interest related to image aquisition, >pre/post-processing, analog video signal processing, (not VCR, Beta, etc.) >vision systems and real-time scene analysis to warrant the creation of >net.image. > Dean Wormell I am one of 50+ people who work on image processing at Honeywell. We are interested in the creation of net.image for the discussion of image proc. topics. I am sure there are other IP groups out there, let's here from you. Christopher Meier Honeywell Systems & Research Center Signal & Image Processing ihnp4!umn-cs!srcsip!meier
tombre@crin.UUCP (Karl Tombre) (09/10/85)
We are also a group working on image processing and we would be
interested in a net.image group.
--
--- Karl Tombre @ CRIN (Centre de Recherche en Informatique de Nancy)
UUCP: ...!vmucnam!crin!tombre or ...!inria!crin!tombre
COSAC: crin/tombre
POST: Karl Tombre, CRIN, B.P. 239, 54506 VANDOEUVRE CEDEX, France
"Car le plus lourd fardeau, c'est d'exister sans vivre."
(Victor Hugo)