Re: matrix of an image
- From: ImageAnalyst <imageanalyst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 11, 4:27 pm, "mark b." <john.doe.nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
thanks for comments, but i'm sure i must use interpolation
(as i wrote a message before). main thing of all of this is
that i need to compute the area-when i'll make this binary
image then i'll just simply use 'bwarea'. using
interpolation i won't loose so much information. i checked
with the way You showed me but unfortunatelly i lost too
much and computing the area was far away from the real one.
once again thanks for replying! now i must fight with this
edge thing that doesn't work as it should (as i wrote
before). yh..
kind regards:)
Well the main thing that we're all trying to understand is: Why on
earth are you using floating point numbers as indexes into an array?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: matrix of an image
- From: mark b.
- Re: matrix of an image
- References:
- matrix of an image
- From: mark b.
- Re: matrix of an image
- From: Walter Roberson
- Re: matrix of an image
- From: ImageAnalyst
- Re: matrix of an image
- From: mark b.
- matrix of an image
- Prev by Date: Re: Bringing "a single frame" from "avifile"
- Next by Date: Re: overloaded set functions
- Previous by thread: Re: matrix of an image
- Next by thread: Re: matrix of an image
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
