On 7/6/06, Anthony Thyssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter Valdemar Mørch on wrote... | I'm amazed, though, that this isn't something that is in the standard | lib. Especially since lots of image experience and optimization seems | appropriate given the above discussion.I agree that these sort of functions should be more commonly available. But I also don't want to specialize the function to the point where it is only really useful to a single basic application. This is why a more general sub-image locating function also needs to be able to handle * Fuzzy matching (near by not exact the same color (caused by JPEG distortions, shading, color * Perhaps only matching a high percentage of pixels EG: a small part of the sub-image on the main image was obscured say by other image overlays, copyright notices, etc. * sub-image has transparent areas that are not to be matched against the main image (EG: a shaped image) * The posibility to find multiple matching locations All of these are of course optional, but the initial algorithm should at least be able to be expanded to handle these things.
Those are some great features, but I don't see them as necessary. It's like saying that a string searching function should really be a regular expression matcher, when really all that's needed is case-insensitivity. GNS _______________________________________________ Magick-users mailing list [email protected] http://studio.imagemagick.org/mailman/listinfo/magick-users
