Hi,
I'm trying to do phase reconstruction on images which involves switching
back and forth between Fourier space and real space. I'm trying to test
numpy ( scipy, for that matter) just to see if I can go back and forth.
After an FFT/iFFT, the resulting image is garbage. I'm using
Hi Mike
2008/7/2 Mike Sarahan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm trying to do phase reconstruction on images which involves switching
back and forth between Fourier space and real space. I'm trying to test
numpy ( scipy, for that matter) just to see if I can go back and forth.
After an FFT/iFFT, the
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 16:33, Mike Sarahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to do phase reconstruction on images which involves switching
back and forth between Fourier space and real space. I'm trying to test
numpy ( scipy, for that matter) just to see if I can go back and forth.
I agree that the components are very small, and in a numeric sense, I
wouldn't worry at all about them, but the image result is simply noise,
albeit periodic-looking noise.
Here's a code snippet:
import numpy,Image
img=Image.open('LlamaTeeth.jpg')
Mike Sarahan wrote:
I agree that the components are very small, and in a numeric sense, I
wouldn't worry at all about them, but the image result is simply noise,
albeit periodic-looking noise.
Fernando Perez and John Hunter have written a nice FFT image denoising
example:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 17:14, Mike Sarahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that the components are very small, and in a numeric sense, I
wouldn't worry at all about them, but the image result is simply noise,
albeit periodic-looking noise.
Here's a code snippet:
Hi Mike
2008/7/3 Mike Sarahan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree that the components are very small, and in a numeric sense, I
wouldn't worry at all about them, but the image result is simply noise,
albeit periodic-looking noise.
Here's a code snippet:
Beautiful! Thanks Stefan! It was the PIL bug.
Thanks for all the replies.
-Mike
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 01:00 +0200, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
Hi Mike
2008/7/3 Mike Sarahan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree that the components are very small, and in a numeric sense, I
wouldn't worry at all
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Andrew Straw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Sarahan wrote:
I agree that the components are very small, and in a numeric sense, I
wouldn't worry at all about them, but the image result is
