Subject:
|
Re: Vision command + linux
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:54:26 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Steve Baker <sjbaker1@!Spamcake!airmail.net>
|
Viewed:
|
763 times
|
| |
|
|
PeterBalch wrote:
> If you convert the image into (straight or curved) line segments then its
> easier and cheaper to match "corresponding" segments between images.
>
> My guess is that "Snakes" would help here. I used Snakes for an "AI" vision
> project last year (analysing medical ultrasonic images) and was very
> impressed with how well they coped with noisy blurred images. Their
> "capture distance" is far better than the 4 pixels you're working with.
> They're easy to implement too.
Do you have a web site or something where I could read more about this?
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
GCS d-- s:+ a+ C++++$ UL+++$ P--- L++++$ E--- W+++ N o+ K? w--- !O M-
V-- PS++ PE- Y-- PGP-- t+ 5 X R+++ tv b++ DI++ D G+ e++ h--(-) r+++ y++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Vision command + linux
|
| Steve (...) That must be fairly costly if you want bigger offsets and probably fails during a zoom or roll of the camera. (...) Makes sense. If you convert the image into (straight or curved) line segments then its easier and cheaper to match (...) (21 years ago, 14-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
