Re: Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- From: "aruzinsky" <aruzinsky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:52:23 -0400
"If one zooms in at the result image, the response appears different
for the dots away from the center as compared to at the center.
Do you also notice that?"
Yes, for all integer scale factors, the responses should be the same. For
non integer scales, they change with location. Sometimes programmers cheat
by enlarging slightly larger than specified to avoid extrapolation near the
image boundaries, but, in this case, if anything, the image appears
slightly smaller than it should.
Also, the sum of luminances of the response pixels should equal the
scale^2 times the luminance of the impulse. For the center response, I
count 1540 when it should be 4*255 = 1020. Possibly, you have clipped
negative values to zero that would account for this. That is why you
should look at the response against a grey background.
"I wonder if that is because of floating point precision error in mapping
co-ordinates on to the non-integral source image grid."
No, 32 bit floating point is adequate.
.
- References:
- Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- From: Pixel.to.life
- Re: Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- From: Pixel.to.life
- Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- Prev by Date: Re: Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- Next by Date: Convert 16 bit grayscale TIFF to 8 bit RGB PNG images after applying a filter
- Previous by thread: Re: Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- Next by thread: Re: Back to basics: Interpolation teaser
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|