On 8/22/07, Thomas Lytje <dadane@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I am not sure you take feature requests like this, - but try to take a look. > It seems quite cool. > I don't know enough about image processing (but I am a software engineer) > but to me it looks like it wouldn't be to hard to implement. Hopefully there > isn't a lot of patens making it impossible Looks like a resizer in which the amount of source pixels per output pixel varies spatially, rather than being roughly constant. It seems to have a few requirements: a) Resizing can only be done on one axis at once b) two scalers would be needed, one iterating over X axis, one over Y. Basically the only change relative to normal accumulators is that the number of pixels resulting in a final pixel would need to be inversely weighted by the significance mask (that is, read more input pixels to produce an output pixel in insignificant areas.) There is also one coefficient involved that would need some experimentation with to get right: the exact ratio of scaling between completely significant pixels and completely insignificant pixels. (I mean, when you shrink that image, the significant features must also shrink somewhat -- at least once they begin to push up against each other.) Anyway, if you give a link to a paper describing the exact workings of the algorithym, then it's much more likely that something will get done in relation to it. _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
