Picture comparison

Hi, I am new to Java card technology. I have recently installec java card development kit on my computer. I want to create an application just like finger print identification through image comparison. Can somebody plz help me in telling the requirements and the necessary things i-e api's or hardware devices i should have with me ???
Prompting reply will be appreciated.
Salman.

Similar Messages

Has anybody done a picture comparison betw HVR A1 and HVR Z1/FX1?

I'd like to know what the difference in picture quality is between the 3 CCD HVR Z1/FX1 cam's and the new CMOS based HVR A1E
much appreciated

The au1 looks to me like a beefed up version of the HDR-HC1 that also uses the CMOS chip. You can find a review and comparisons at the following site
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-HCR-HC1-Review.htm

Viewing picture from 2 Projects, How?

Seems I saw something about having 2 Projects open at once, but can't remember how. Is there any other way to do this picture comparison. I would like them both on my 2nd monitor.
Thanks for the help.
Mark

while you can show two projects side by side (select the first project and then option-click the second project), you can not display 2 images (one from project 1 and another from project 2) on your secondary screen for side-by-side comparison. the viewer (and secondary monitor) are always linked to the active project.
instead of showing two projects side by side (with "option"), you can also open several projects in tabs (selecting them with holding "command").

N97 vs N85 vs N95 camera comparison

Hi everybody, i did a quick camera comparison between these devices. I checked the pictures, so come and take a look its worth it!!
http://carltone65.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/n85-vs-n95-vs-n97-pictures-comparison/

For those who say the camera sucks, take a look here...
The pictures do not lie and neither does the EXIF data.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/24298488@N00/pool/
Ericssson EH 237, Ericsson EH 337, Ericsson GH 388, Siemens S25, Nokia 6210, Nokia 7250, Nokia 6230, Nokia 6280 & O2 Atom , Nokia N95, Nokia 5800 XpressMusic

Vision builder ai

Hello,
I have a problem by LED function inspection test. This is on Vision Builder AI program. There is a camera, it captures an image. The images have a little different gain, brightness, contrast values, so the later inspections have different measure values. I would like to make a picture comparison between a captured image, and a reference image. After then, I would like to set the gain, brightness, contrast values automatically, like the reference image.
How can I make this? Whitch program? LabWIEV or Vision Builder AI?
Thank, for your help!

Dear koma1989!
Is your problem still open?
If yes, I suggest you to try with VBAI first, and if the results are not good enough, you can change to LV to create a more traceable application.
In VBAI, (I'm using 2011 SP1) please choose the "Other.." option from "Run Inspection" section. Examples will open, and you can try out some, so you can get started easily in VBAI.
I don't think there will be an already working solution for this application, but in my opinion you could put it together from example applications.
If an example appears in Inspector interface (In title you can find "...-Inspector-..."), you can switch to edit mode via Inspection >> Switch to Configuration Interface
From the examples I recommend you the followings:
- Tutorial 4 - Tow cameras inspection
- Classify Colours Example
- Inspect Contours Example
- Segment Color Image Example
- And examples related to State diagram, since you have to check for differences, and than correct the image, so some processing regarding to the differences.
I hope browsing examples will help to get some ideas, if you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to post them.
BR,
Balazs Nagy

Compare Bluray and Dvd Chapters and Scrolling still text

Question 1:
Using PremierePro CS5 to set some Encore-Markers and DynamicLink to Encore to create menu:
Using the same project, the behaviour is quite different:
for Dvd : Encore-markers behave like Chapters, so I can use the player remote control to go to next chapter (even it is not defined in the menu)
that is very handly function.
for Bluray : Encore-markes behave like Titles and not Chapters, so I cannot use the player remote control to jump to next Encore-markers
I just looking for references to understand and do the correct ajustments.
Thanks
tt
Question 2:
Using PremierePro CS5 to add a still picture and scroll it up in slow motion:
Using the same project, I understand that Bluray is far better than DVD:
for Bluray : the scrolling of the still picture is smooth (it's very pleasant with texts too)
for Dvd : the scrolling is jumpy (texts are dizzy and not readable)
Is there any fix for that (.....something like PremierePro option to smooth it out a little (result little burry) or ... something like ...deinterlacing ?)
Thanks
tt

POINT 1:
I will skip DynamicLink for circumventing some issues for sure, but it is so handy and makes me lazy to do things fast.
So far I am using DynamicLink for updating still images in menu with Photoshop and it's working fine.
Also I have tried sucessfully modifying some assets using AfterEffect. Yes, there are ressources demanding since I have a skinny 12 Gigs RAM.
POINT 2:
I have to be more specific in comparing Encore-Bluray and Encore-Dvd (I am not comparing HD with SD).
I just want to see the big picture comparison (equivalent between Encore-Bluray and Encore-Dvd) instead of "TRY-AND-SEE"
Let me explain:
1. Encore-Marker set in PremierePro-CS5 is consider as Chapter in Encore-Dvd)
2. The final DVD created: I can use the remote control to jump to next Chapter even the Chapter is not referenced anywhere in Encore-Dvd
3. Encore-Marker set in PremierePro-CS5 is consider as Title in Encore-Bluray) (the same Encore-Marker)
4. The final Bluray created: I cannot use the remote to jump because there is only one Chapters but many Titles.
When I am on the last step, of Encore-CS5-Build-Dvd or Encore-CS5-Build-Bluray, i expect to get the same result when playing the Bluray of Dvd
with the Player (Home DVD Player or Home Bluray Player and absolutely no PC )
WHAT ELSE IS DIFFERENT BETWEEN THOSE TWO FORMATS? for the same project in ENCORE-CS5
(I need that information to explain to the end users)
for now, I just try-and-see and take notes.
tt

I had my pictures in XP in "My Documents", how do I find my pictures in My Documents in Windows 7 ?

I had my pictures in XP in "My Documents", how do I find my pictures in My Documents in Windows 7 ?

There is a change of folder structure in Windows 7 in comparison with Windows XP
For advanced search I recommend article
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/advanced-tips-for-searching-in-windows
HTH
Milos
PS: Perhaps the more appropriate forum fothis kind of problem is here
answers.microsoft.com

Some pictures in slideshow are pixilated

I'm making a slideshow in Aperture (3.2.2) on my iMac (3.4 GHz Intel Core i7, Memory 16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3) running Mac OS X 10.6.8, and some of the photos that were transferred from a CD-ROM, and some that were recently transferred from an SD card are pixilated! I've done many slideshows before, and have never experienced this. The File size of the image doesn't matter. Some of the larger megapixel images are very pixilated, while some of the very small images (356 K) are not.
It's also happening in iPhoto. Also, when I move a photo from Aperture to iPhoto, the file size is reduced dramatically. Why does this happen?
I am hoping that someone out there has a simple solution for this! Time is of the essence!

Stan,
This completely seems like a case of not having enough resolution in your pictures for the purpose at hand.
It's possible that the slideshow is stretching some of the photos and not others. If I remember right, portrait photos in a slideshow will be letterboxed, with black on either side of the photo so you can see all (or the majority) of your photo on the screen. A photo of the same size, but landscape orientation, will take up the whole screen. Thus, the portrait photo will be shrunk, or alternately (depending on the sizes we're talking about), the landscape will be blown up. Any time you blow up a digital photo, it wil be pixelated. That's the only thing I can think of in terms of your landscape versus portrait.
Your photos are very, very small. It sounds like they are actually thumbnails, or from a very early digital camera when photos that matched the pixel dimensions of the monitor were ok. Your monitor is probably 1.2-1.5 megapixels, so any photo smaller than that runs the chance of not having enough detail to look good.
As for the 0.8 MP and 0.7 MP comparison in your email, I'm guessing that you are talking about JPEGs. JPEG is a lossy format, and when the file is created, the creator of the file determines how much information to throw away. It's possible that there was too much information thrown away (maybe to get to a certain file size) to recreate a good-looking photo.
One thing to try -- open one of the bad-looking photos in Preview and look at it with 1-1 zoom. That will show you how large the photo really could look on your monitor without being "blown up."
nathan

Significant loss of picture quality in iMovie, what are my other options???

Hello All,
I am new to the Mac world moving over from windows.
Hooking up my dv camcorder (non high-def) to my TV gives a pretty good picture.
If I use iMovie to import from my camcorder and then iDvd to burn a dvd and play the DVD the picture quality is significantly reduced (looks worse than VHS!).
I am reading that this is uncorrectable through any settings available in iMovie or iDVD. This to me is unfathomable!
Being a newbie in the Mac world I don't know what my other options are.
I read about iMovie HD and Final Cut Express but don't know how they position and can I achieve better picture quality preservation.
I want my camcorder picture quality better preserved. I’ve certainly gotten much better results on windows with various packages (but have little experience).
I came into the Mac world believing that this sort of thing is what Mac was great for so a bit surprised.
How do you folks get around such a significant picture quality loss???
My home movies through iMovie and iDVD look embarassing for circa 2009!

I convert my imported dv files to AIC at 1080p before editing.
There is a small quality drop using this approach, I find it acceptable but some others don't.
I have added an original dv movie clip, two exports in different formats of the same clip as prepared in imovie 09 and another of the same clip exported to back to dv as prepared in imovie 6, to a disc image of a DVD created in iDVD.
I don't feel the differences represent the differences some here are reporting they see themselves, see what you think
Source Comparisons (580 MB)

Comparison of open items in the Migration face to New GL

Hi
How do we check open items in the "validation phase" of the migration
cockpit? That is we what to check that the transfer of open items to
the new tables has gone OK before activating New G/L in
the "activation phase".
There is comparison reports that are available in Migration Phase where we check the status
of Open items migrated to newGL tables. But this report are not very good for getting the "Acceptance of Migration Results by Business Owner"
Pre migration the Business Owner will run reports like S_ALR_87012083, S_ALR_ 87012173 and FBL3N in the "preparation phase", so we have a picture of the situation before
migration. But we can't find any similar reports which uses FAGLEFLEX,
which we need to be able to compare data after the migration (but
before activation new G/L). For FBL3N we hoped to use FAGLL03, but this
is not possible as new G/L is not activated.
We have also tried to run /NGL/COMPARE_LEDGERS via SE38 but we can't
get the program to work this way.
So what do we do? Is the only option to created a report i ex FGI0?
Looking forward to hear for you
FYI we don't activate document splitting.
Best Regards
Torben

HI,
Please refer the below link.
http://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/x/JghNCw
Regards
Madhu M

Sony Z1 Compact... why is the camera so poor? Comparison shots within.

The Good...
I picked up a Sony Z1 Compact the other day, and am so far absolutely in love woth it. The speed and responsiveness are fantastic, the build quality rivals that of the iPhone, and the size is just perfection.
The Bad...
But... I am VERY dissappointed with the camera and its poor performance. 80% of the photos I take with my phone are while on a night out with friends, usually in bars or other more dimly lit places than broad daylight. In Auto mode, photos taken in the average pub lightning are unuseable,m and look so artifical as to completely destroy any detail in the faces of the people I snap. I have also experimented with manual settings, but still the quakity is just plain poor. In fact, mny Samsung Galaxy S III blows it out of the water in this regard, images in similar conditions are much superior.
The Ugly...
So why is this camera, a camera that uses what is theoretically a high-quality imaging unit used by point and shoot cameras, so bad in everything except broad daylight?
The answer according to not only my observations, but the observations of many professional websites who reviewed the Z1 series, is seems to be that Sony are purposefully and inexplicably messing with the final images by forcing huge amounts of processing on them. This takes a natural image, messes with the colours and tone, and then proceeds to crush any detail.
Here are some samples of what I mean, taken with Superior Auto:
Sample 1: Z1 Compact
A close-up portrait shot...
Look at how artificial that image looks... it's like someone applied a strange kind of gaussian blur tool in photoshop.
Sample 2 - Z1 Compact
A group photo...
Here again, in what was one of the better photos that I took, we see the find detail is very poor.. at full size it looks horrible pixellated, and the colours severely washed out. The blacks are also severely crushed.
Sample 3 - Z1 Compact
Here is a shot that should in theory be detailed and natural looking. A guy near a wall in better light, with the camera held perfectly still.
Again, a horrible image... bad detail, visible artifacting, washed out colours.
Sample 4 - Z1 Compact
In addition, using the flash causes severe light pollution on the final image, so much so that the bottom half of the photo I take has a very noticeable purpley bluish haze on it.
Look at the level of bleed entering the scene from the flash below the lens. And look at the dreadful overall image quality... the detail is simply shockingly bad. Like a camera phone from years ago.
Samsung Galaxy S III Comparisons...
And here we have some comparison photos with a Samsung SIII, also taken in a dimply lit pub:
Sample 1 - Samsung Galaxy S III
Look at the difference... detail is preserved, the image appears natural, and colour tones are reasonably natural. It's a great shot.
Sample 2 - Samsung Galaxy S III
Again, here we see that the photo is much cleaner... flash lights up the subjkects as well as can be expected considering the size and power, and the colours and detail are preserved, including in the surrounding environment where the coloured lights at the top are also visible.
Sample 3 . Samsung Galaxy S III
And finally, a close-up portrai-style shot...
Again, not the easiest of conditions for a phont, but overall detail is good, the face is clearly visible, and the photo looks clean and detailed as you could hope for in the circumstances.
WINNER: SAMSUNG GALAXY S III
Conclusion...
Sorry Sony, but this level of imaging is just not acceptable on a premium device with such a high spec sensor in it. I have had better results fron devices that are 2-3 years old. Oh yes, and that's including the video camera mode which has no 24p or 60p options... come on Sony, there is a Snapdragon 800 SOC in this phone, use it.
I really hope you are going to take a serious look at this and fix it.

Wow thanks guys... it seems a LOT of people have noticed this issue. I also saw one guy with exactly the same problem as me with the flash http://www.android-hilfe.de/7156334-post40.html
The question is: how on earth did none of the Sony designers see this issue? It seems to me that someone must have seen it, but too late in the design process, so they just kept it like this and are going to pretend ignorance.
I just did the same test as inside-handy.de where I cover the flash completely and then take a picture, and the light bleeds very badly into the lens, so I guess my phone is badly affected.
I do not expect such a badly designed camera and flash system on such a premium device, and we cannot be expected to live with such a fatal flaw in a phone which is marketed as a pure camera phone.
EDIT - It seems the press are now aware and will be following this up... hopefully Sony will make a response soon when they see the overwhelming evidence http://www.inside-handy.de/news/30330-led-erzeugt-farbiges-leuchten-auf-bildern-sony-xperia-z1-compa...

How to fix FO picture files created from interexchange

Hi,
I am working on a catalog from a client. There are 645 picture links which were not sent with the job (3GB worth). I did the job in CS4 and saved as .inx so my client could open it in CS3. In CS3, all the picture files are gray boxes marked FO and all the links are missing from the link palette. Is there an easy fix for this?
Thanks

Stephanie sent me the problem file last night and I've done a bit of playing.
It opened after around five minutes (maybe more) in CS3 with the expected missing links and missing fonts warnings and the gray boxes. Many of the gray frames have tags associated with them (FPO - which means "For Position Only" - on page 1) which are separate text frames added to tell whoever is working on the file that these are not the final images. That cleared up one qustion I had.
More importanly though, there were supposed to be 695 links. I looked in the links panel and all of the links were listed as foo.jpg, with a path of C:\foo.jpg, clearly not correct (I didn't count to see if there were 695). So I took a look at the .inx file as text.
.inx is basically XML, I think, but not really intended for human parsing. You can, however read it (and if you know what you're doing, which I don't, edit it) in a text editor, and it's pretty easy to recognize things like link paths. The correct paths seemed to be in place, so foo.jpg is clearly garbage and I have no idea where it came from.
I opened the same .inx in CS4. It opened more quickly, and showed the links as expected, just as Stephanie reported above, so I saved the file as a new .indd and then exportd a new .inx.
The new .inx was also slow to open in CS3, but this time the links were correctly imported and shown in the links panel, though of course they are still missing. This is the correct and expected behavior. My conclusion from this is that there is something odd about the first .inx file.
The first difference I noticed is that my file is smaller by about 100,000 bytes (both are over 17 MB). They are too large to do a complete comparison, but there are some differences in the beginnings of the files which I am not able to interpret, some differnces in swatch listings for Pantone spot colors which I would guess are a settings difference in Ink Manager for using LAB values for convrting spot to process.
I also noticed what appears to be some additional information included in the link listings of the first file which is not present in the second. I don't know how to read the tags or interpret the hex codes included, so I don't kow if this is significant, but I suspect that's the problem.
In any case, I'd like to know if Stepahnie did a plain Save or a Save AS before doing the initial export. My instinct is that a long series of regular saves left a lot of useless change information in the file that found its way into the .inx. Doing a Save As removes all of that garbage data from previous sessions and reduces the size of the .indd file and makes for cleaner export.
The bottom line, I think, is that the original .inx is defective, but that it could be regenerated successfully. If you have the time, can you do a Save As on the ID file, then make a new .inx and send that to me to see how it opens in CS3? I'm going to send you the one I made from the .inx you sent last night which appears to be usable, but it doesn't really solve the problem of WHY the first file was bad.
Peter

Bad quality pictures in dim light

When I'm in dim light situations, (Bar) my pictures are grainy and really dark. When I used several of my friends iPhones to take additional pics, I noticed 1) the image on the screen before taking the picture is brighter. 2) the picture is is better quaility, more vibrant. My comparison was against 2 other iPhone 4S'. Also, when using my flash, the pics have a blue tint. I always assumed that this is because of the use of an LED as the flash. Compared to both my friends iPhones, theirs is more normal looking.
Should I just take it into the Apple Store and let them deal with this?

cosoriocadenas wrote:
Why my iphone 4S takes bad quality pictures in interiors? low light
You answered your own question. It's the low light.
What is the solution to this issue?
Are you using the flash?
You might also want to try out an app called King Camera. It allows a bit of control over exposure that might help.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/king-camera/id430240788?mt=8
Matt

Canon (EOS 50D) Picture Styles in LR41

Hey there,
first let me tell you that I'm familiar with LR concepts. I read a lot about RAW processing, color profiles and stuff. It all makes sense to me.
That having said... I'm unfortunatly quite unhappy with LR's color reproduction. It seems technically very accurate; unfortunatly -- Canon's own "Standard Picture Style" (so OOC JPEGs) are in most cases much nicer to look at, color-wise.
I know it's not me alone having this feeling (just do a quick search).
Adobe provides look-alike profiles (.DCP-files) which are supposed to imitate Canon's Picture Styles. Unfortunatly none of these Adobe-profiles comes close (enough, IMHO) - most annoying thing for me is a strange blue/green cast in darker areas, e.g. shadows in daylight conditions are too bright and too blueish.
Remember, I'm using a EOS 50D (which probably won't get profile updates any more by Adobe, I suppose...)
So here's my question:
Can I assume that Adobe already did the best they can to match Canon's Picture Style?
==> stop dreaming about a "better" "canon-50d-standard.dcp"-file.
Take it or leave it, stop crying.
Or is there a possibility to tweak existing profiles?
==> find out how.
Adobe's DCP editor, dcptool, whatever?
Thanks for your suggestions!
Medon

Hmm, well...
Which one do you like best, which looks worst, and why?
Pictures A/B/C
All three unchanged except for the different applied profiles.
Cheers, Medon
P.S.:
If you'd like to please download them to a folder, so you can flip through them. Side-by-side comparison doesn't reveal the differences so well, IMHO.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50976394/LR_Canon/A_small.jpg
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50976394/LR_Canon/B_small.jpg
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50976394/LR_Canon/C_small.jpg
A
B
C

3D-picture quality in Word

I have a 3D model created in PROE that I have imported to Acrobat 3D. I have made an exploded view and then imported it in Word. The picture that looks great in Adobe, looks like ¤%!##& in word. I have "Publishing" in the Import Settings Profile while importing it into word. That is the best as I understood from the books I read about Acrobat 3D. Are there any other settings that can make the picture look better in word (both on screen and on a paper copy).
BR,
Anna

Overall the picture quality on FiOS should be superior to comcast or cox or any other provider with the exception of DTV. they have a pretty close picture, if not equal. Some basics are important, You should have an HD tv set, you should have an HD Set top box, and they should be connected to one another using a single HDMI cable.
Make sure to check that.
Then the set top box needs to be set properly. it's unusual for it not to be, but double check just in case.
click menu>settings>video settings.
There are two settings that are important here
Video Format should be set to 1080i
and
SD OVERRIDE should be set to either OFF (preferred) or 480i
If those things are all ok, or done, then go to channel 600 for CNN HD or Try to find discovery HD, and then make the comparison.
If you flip between channel 100 and 600, can you tell the difference?
If not, then there is something wrong.
Hope that helps a little.
Also let us know if it's just overall picture quality, or if you are getting channel break up or pixelization. it looks like the picture is digitizing or is blocky, or choppy.
If it's tiling or pixelizing, then take a look at this page, and see if these suggestions help.
Tiling and Pixelation issues

Picture comparison

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for