Re: Accurate edge detection?

On Jul 31, 5:51=A0pm, Andrew_M <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > =A0It would be very simple to set an appropriate threshold and cut
> > > all the rest of diffraction off, but I didn't do it especially to
sho=
w
> > > restoration technique. I've just have restored some text instead of
m=
y
> > > first set of objects
(http://www.smartfills.com/Html/Images/textdiffr=
..jpg
> > > andhttp://www.smartfills.com/Html/Images/textrestr.jpg)
I do not
> > > think that there is a way (and necessity) make it better.
>
> > Spoken like a true resarcher. Where is it published?
>
> > illywhacker;
>
> In font of your eyes, only. The last sentence of your own caused my
> strong desire to tell you some stories about researchers and why this
> word sounds like mating grunt for me. But, this is obviously wrong
> place for it. If you have an interest in technique what I've used to
> revert irreversible transform, you'd better contact me directly. I
> see, that all another boys lost interest in this discussion, and as
> for me I unfortunately have some problems when I have to load each
> time 600K of traffic what is a must to get the last message in this
> topic. Nothing to do, I live in the backside of the civilized world
> and my Net is limited to 15- rarely 20 Kbits (not kilobytes!) per sec.
> I found this Google group three weeks ago and realized that this one
> has some interest for me. I know both physic, math and programming-
> all components what are a must to solve such sort of problems like
> restoration of diffracted images. So I spent two days, playing with
> algorithms. I tested three variants of how it could be done, and later
> found my own old book on computers in image processing. At this book I
> found description of one method, what I had tested and declined
> finally. My variant works better, but not considerably better. The
> only thing what I have discovered (and what was a real surprise for
> me!) was that relatively simple methods can produce good results. I
> mean, that what I used was the only linear algebra- no linear
> programming.
> mats(at)smartfills(dot)com

I haven't lost interest.  I don't understand illywacker's sarcasm of
"true researcher."  It would make more sense if he said "pure
researcher."  Commercial applied research that cannot be published
because of its proprietary nature is still true research but not pure
research.  On the other hand, most papers published in electrical
engineering journals represent pure research in the sense that their
findings have no foreseeable practical use.  For engineers, that is
immoral hypocrisy that deserves sarcasm.  And, IEEE typically charges
$35 for you to buy a paper and then discover it is useless.  You can't
judge a paper by its abstract anymore than judge a book by its cover.