Re: Accurate edge detection?

On Jul 22, 6:02=A0pm, Andrew_M <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Andrew,
>
> > Thank you for your interest and offer to review some sample images.
> > Unfortunately, our concern is not on the software or algorithmic side,
> > but on the optical side. =A0As I mentioned in my original post:
>
> > "Does anyone have references they can point to (or their own
> > pesuasive
> > arguments) that describe where the true edge location should be
> > relative to the edge image function?"
>
> I do not see, what do you mean. What cardinal enchancement with
> optical side could be done? To change wave lenght, use larger lens or
> increase exposure? As a result in any event you'll get a scanned
> digital image, what has to be processed by some soft. There are some
> things, what cannot be done without proper algorithms. Have you ever
> heard about superresolution (or overresolution- I'm not sure about
> proper term- English isn't my mother's tongue). It is something like
> what you want to get- obtain better resolution than your optical
> system allows. I could only repeat- it is not a problem of where the
> true edge is, it is a problem of restoration of a transformed image.
> This problem requires specific methods. I twice made progs for science
> image processing, and in any event I had to use much more complicated
> methods than what my client thought.
> Andrew

Hi Andrew,

Perhaps my just-posted reply to Aruzinsky might clarify what I'm
saying.  Or, it might just muddy things up to perfect opacity. :-)

Spencer