Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2005
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2005

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Graphical modeling of extinct lifeforms with Mathematica

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg58733] Re: [mg58720] Re: Graphical modeling of extinct lifeforms with Mathematica
  • From: Jeff Bryant <jeffb at wolfram.com>
  • Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 01:03:42 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <db7o1c$mtr$1@smc.vnet.net> <200507151814.OAA03605@smc.vnet.net>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

   I didn't realize this went to MathGroup as well so I'm replying to 
the whole group this time.    If you look at the Mathematica notebook, 
and closely at the images, the processing was in the removal of dirt and 
dust from the raw image frame.  The first image shows little "cheerios" 
resulting from this dust which is unfocused.  The middle image shows 
this dirt removed.  The final frame shows the processed frame, but 
zoomed in.  You need to read the Mathematica notebook to get a better 
idea of what's happening.

I do agree that this is minimal image processing in many people's eyes. 
  I have not done any stretching of the data values since the image 
processing I did and still do from time to time is used for photometry. 
  I typically do photometry and you don't want to apply scaling to the 
pixel values since you often want to compare them to other pixels in the 
same field for comparison.

Your scaling and glare removal suggestion might make a pretty picture, 
but the goal was to get the image ready for data extraction which means 
scaling would be a bad idea.

In any case, I renamed the titles/captions to say "Astronomical Image 
Reduction" which is definitely more appropriate.

Thanks for the suggestion,
-Jeff

Kevin J. McCann wrote:
> I took a look at your nice website. The 2d astronomical image processing 
> though is basically just a plot of the data without Mathematica's choice 
> for the PlotRange. A PlotRange ->{Automatic,Automatic,All} on the 
> original raw image works just fine. So, I am not sure where the image 
> processing is.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> 
> Jeff Bryant wrote:
> 
>>   I have added another animation to my visualization site.  This one is 
>>an animated model of Anomalocaris canadensis, an extinct creature from 
>>the Cambrian period about 550 million years ago.  The model was created 
>>entirely from graphics primitives and top level functions, not imported 
>>data.
>>
>>http://members.wri.com/jeffb/visualization/animations.shtml
>>
>>There's also a new 2D visualization showing astonomical image processing:
>>
>>http://members.wri.com/jeffb/visualization/2d.shtml
>>
>>-Jeff
>>


  • Prev by Date: Notebook Style problems?
  • Next by Date: Re: Complement replacement
  • Previous by thread: Re: Graphical modeling of extinct lifeforms with Mathematica
  • Next by thread: Polynomial eigenvalue problem