Hi I'm getting some strange results using imdilate. I've been comparing the output from imdilate with several text-book examples and I haven't got it right yet (with non-symmetrical structuring elements at least)
code example: image = [ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ]; se = [ 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 ]; imdilate(image, se) ans = 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 However, I should have got 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 I almost get it right if I calculate dilation through erosion of the image complement, !imerode (!image, imrotate(se, 180)) ans = 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 only the first row and column are wrong because when doing the erosion the "outside of image" are cosidered zeros and not ones so it's not really the complement of the image. Or maybe I'm just completely wrong, I only started working on morphological processing this week. Carnë Draug ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
