| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
> I had assumed that 'sharpness' and 'softness' in an > image related to the 'contrast' between pixels at > boundaries (steepness of gradient?). At its simplest > in my models, if I have a line of black or red pixels > on a white background, I deem that as being a sharp > image. If I interpose several rows of pixels of > intermediate colour between my white pixels and black > ones, I see the black line as becoming 'softer', and > the wider the boundary between the black line and the > white background becomes, the 'softer' the image > becomes. Now what's wrong with that analysis? Nothing, at all, is wrong with your analysis or understanding. Kennedy possibly does not understand what you said, or misunderstands the image process. > However, reading your hi-fi analogy again That was a bad analogy, since audio "waves" can be reasonably accurately completed by interpolation, and image data can not. Image data can have 0 slope, audio can not. Audio data always has a slope. Image data can have adjacent values of 0 and, say, 255 thar are scene accurate. Interpolating between them gives 127...and is not scene accurate. As you say, it "softens" the image at the boundary. ----- Sent using MailStart.com ( http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html ) The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere! - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users
|