Live data from Hacker News

Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

aaronhertzmann.com

111–120 of 174 posts

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#111
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the universe we live right now is no different than a simulation. Subtle difference in belief but I think it might have a big implication.

There is one key difference between reality and simulation. In reality you have to spend energy to remove noise. In simulation you have to spend energy to add noise. Or perhaps more accurately, all objects interact in reality and energy needs to be spent to prevent interaction, while simulation requires energy to make objects interact. But it’s even worse than it sounds at first, because you need to spend energy not…

Perhaps a foolish question but does “simulation” necessarily imply calculation or is that just an extension of our current evolution of computing technology as an analogy for what a simulation would be? I’m not convinced the one necessitates the other.

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#113
post #3

As someone (probably like many here) who graduated from a university which taught computer vision and peripheral neuroscience courses, with such titles as "Computational Neuroscience of Vision", I always felt that trying to understand the human brain as a kind of algorithm was a bit of an artefact of computer scientists as they approach biology. The truth is the visual cortex is vast, and not sufficient to explain th…

ah, someone who paid attention in lecture! (incidentally; there’s a fairly deep literature of historians of science that have carefully documented that we describe ourselves as analogous to the most sophisticated technology of the day: see “to lose one’s temper”, “to blow a gasket”, “i got my wires crossed”, “sorry, cache miss”, … as metaphors and idioms of mental state through the centuries that reflect the cool tec…

> cache miss

Ooh, I like that one. Stealing it

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#114
Figuring this out is one of the central questions of phenomenology... how is it that after seeing a couple of trees, we can recognize almost any kind of tree from any angle? What is intrinsic about a tree that makes this possible? What (or is) there a pure form of a tree?

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#115
post #37
post #9

Ten years or so ago I was working on a video chip that had an upscaler feature. While prototyping and simulating it, we first started by applying a mathematically-correct (i.e. information preserving) FIR filter to do the upscale. Then we compared the result with other solutions and found that ours looked worse. We asked our colleagues to blind-test it and they all picked third-party-scaled images over ours. At first…

The upscaled image stores more information than the original image, so it must be possible to keep all the information while still doing edge enhancement!

Stores more data, but the same information, and if there is any interpolation then some of the data is modified, meaning that you lose a little data. In fact even without interpolation I think you change the data.

If you imagine a hard edge that aligns with a pixel [] boundary then you imagine upscaling in various ways, I think it's QED. You change data about the sharpness of the edge.

[] I use an Android phone, with Google's keyboard it genuinely rendered "pixel" with a capital letter. I've never written about Google's device of that name. Silly Google.

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#116

Very frustrating article to read. The article is setting up a straw man and attacking it. He is acting like everyone else thinks: 1) edges are the only important features in images and 2) line drawings can only represent edges. Who are these brainless absolutists that he is attacking? Then he's acting like he is the only one with other bright ideas that nobody will listen to. I think it is obvious to anyone who think…

One of the problems right off the bat is not understanding that the classical "edge detection" algorithm doesn't actually detect edges. It detects rapid change in contrast. To then claim this computer algorithm's flaws are somehow proof that a psychological theory is therefore wrong is itself the categorically wrong thing.

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#117
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And also the universe itself is often seen through the lens of contemporary technology. Are we living on an island that floats on a giant turtle’s back? Or are the heavens like giant clockworks? Or maybe it’s all a computer simulation? These cosmological speculations are separated by thousands of years, but they are all simply a reflection of what the person finds most awe-inspiring in their everyday life.

Reasoning by analogy is one of the ways we solve the framing problem. So, when explaining the universe we imagine it's an act of will by a conscious entity (ie., like how we invent). When explaining the mind we suppose it's like one of our inventions. Absent an analogy of some kind it's quite hard to determine what features are salient. Objects have an essentially infinite number of properties.

And absent an understanding of electric fields and meteorology, that lightning bolt over there must have been hurled by Zeus!

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, thank you. I’d always thought this a Pratchett things. I see it has a history in India and China too. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Turtle

How could at least two cultures without a communication line between them both come up with such a quirky idea? There must be some underlying truth to it.. I'm sold. World turtle is the answer.

Chinese writing began with turtle shells as well, that's why the mostly conform to a sort of grid system, with curves.

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#119
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to lose one’s temper Huh, never thought about that one before. Linguistic stuff like this is fun to find; these days I mostly spot it via learning German as a second language, so the artifice in artificial intelligence becomes “Künstliches Intelligenz” where “Kunst” is artist and “Kunststoff” is plastic, and in Middle Low German “kunst” is knowledge and ability. > coined Deliberate choice to exemplify your point, o…

Just an interesting connection, in English, "plastic" comes from Greek, via Latin (and Medieval Italian) "to mold". We see this meaning show up in phrases like "neural plasticity," which refers to the brain's capacity to learn, (re)grow, and make new connections (e.g. knowledge and abilities).

It's also used when talking about magma.

Re: Edge detection doesn’t explain line drawing

#120
A drawing of a cup has 'cup-ness', as far as our mind is concerned. It's not about the micro mechanisms of edge detection or color or whatever, it's about how we recognize the quality of a cup in real cups and things that push the margins for what a cup is and in drawings of a cup.
Post reply on HN