shankar@brand.UUCP (Shankar Chatterjee) (08/08/85)
What happened to forming image processing/vision group ? A couple of weeks ago there was a lot of discussion about it. Are people considering about forming one seriously ? However, there is no doubt that net.graphics is sometimes fairly informative, but issues such as image smoothing, filtering, texture and/or scene understanding etc. might overburden it.
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (08/13/85)
> ... issues such as image smoothing, filtering, texture > and/or scene understanding etc. might overburden [net.graphics] So far, there has been no sign of this happening, which is why the issue of a separate newsgroup was dropped. "Don't fix it if it ain't broken." -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
ken@turtlevax.UUCP (Ken Turkowski) (08/14/85)
In article <155@brand.UUCP> shankar@brand.UUCP (Shankar Chatterjee) writes: >What happened to forming image processing/vision group ? A couple of weeks ago >there was a lot of discussion about it. Are people considering about forming >one seriously ? However, there is no doubt that net.graphics is sometimes >fairly informative, but issues such as image smoothing, filtering, texture >and/or scene understanding etc. might overburden it. I think there was somewhat of a consensus to hold the image processing and pattern recognition discussions here in net.graphics, at least until net.graphics is overburdened with it. The description in the checkgroups message should be updated to read: net.graphics Computer graphics, art, animation, image processing, pattern recognition, and machine vision. -- Ken Turkowski @ CADLINC, Menlo Park, CA UUCP: {amd,decwrl,hplabs,nsc,seismo,spar}!turtlevax!ken ARPA: turtlevax!ken@DECWRL.ARPA