Live data from Hacker News

Ditherpunk: The article I wish I had about monochrome image dithering

surma.dev

201–203 of 203 posts

Re: Ditherpunk: The article I wish I had about monochrome image dithering

#201
post #89
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is what the engines are doing during the majority of the ascent of the Starship SN8 test vehicle[0]. You can see the engines gimbaling very slightly in a circular pattern. [0]: https://youtu.be/ap-BkkrRg-o?t=6516

Anything controlled by a PID can easily end up in a circular pattern, so it's not a given that this was to avoid stiction. [edit] 1 dimensional PIDs can end up in a sinusoidal dynamic equilibrium, and a 2 dimensional sine wave is an ellipse.

It's not an ellipse if the axes have different periods: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%3Dsin%28t%29%2C+y%3D...

(Is there a name for this kind of curve?)

Re: Ditherpunk: The article I wish I had about monochrome image dithering

#202
post #124

3 minutes to generate 64 by 64 pixels blue noise? I think one should be able to instead draw white noise in frequency domain, multiply with a noise amplitude profile and then a 2D FFT...should only take some milliseconds..

That's right! I was so confused when I read the article, and being satisfied with getting just a 50% boost from using your home brew FFT, was somewhat disheartening.

That is truly like if you're happy that your implementation of quicksort is 50% faster than your insertion sort. It's just that bad of a result, that you really have to stop and wonder if perhaps you did it wrong.

Re: Ditherpunk: The article I wish I had about monochrome image dithering

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea what those parameters represent, but I'm very curious! Could you give a layman's explanation?

The standard PRBS23 polynomial is X^23 + X^18 + 1. Most of the factors are zero. Only the factors for exp 23,18,1 are 1. This causes poor bit mixing - ie the output sequence will have strong correlation every 23 bits. Choosing a "fat" primitive polynomial, ie a polynomial not from this list[0] but rather a polynomial with 50% of the taps are 1 (but it still must be primitive[1]), increases the avalanche effect[2] to…

Why aren't such dense polynomials used more often?

Is it that we trade off something in return for less short-term correlation (maybe more long-term correlation)?

Post reply on HN