[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-bugs-dist
Subject:    [palapeli] [Bug 337972] IDEA: Non-uniform piece size based on image detail
From:       Ian Wadham <iandw.au () gmail ! com>
Date:       2014-08-03 0:22:06
Message-ID: bug-337972-17878-tEhfx1r0KC () http ! bugs ! kde ! org/
[Download RAW message or body]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=337972

Ian Wadham <iandw.au@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |iandw.au@gmail.com

--- Comment #2 from Ian Wadham <iandw.au@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Matthew Woehlke from comment #0)
> I had a dream (not the M. L. King kind, but the waking-from-sleep kind) this
> morning, in which there was a jigsaw puzzle. This puzzle was unusual for
> having pieces of widely varying sizes, based on the local level of detail.

Hopefully not of the Stephen King kind... But what would be the objectives of
such a puzzle from the user's point of view?

Seems to me it -might- have effects like:

 - Evenly colored objects such as sky become easier, through having fewer
pieces,
 - Fractal type objects such as trees become harder, through having lots of
pieces covering similar-looking details,
 - Non-fractal type objects such as buildings become easier, through having
details segregated onto one piece, rather than randomly split.

> While still half asleep, I a) got the idea that it would be cool if Palapeli
> could do this, and b) came up with an algorithm.

You might also be interested in these links, which I found via Google images
for "Voronoi grid":
http://www.swstechnology.com/blog/voronoi-cells-and-modflow-usg
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~quake/triangle.html

> There are two other desired refinements (actually, these would apply to the
> existing irregular slicer also, if it doesn't use them already). First, for
> each cell vertex, find the largest angle Ī±, and compute a weighted random
> chance (Ī±=180 ° ā†’ pā‰ˆ0.9, Ī±=90 ° ā†’ pā‰ˆ0.3) of forming the edges of said angle to
> be G2 continuous at that point. Second, for each edge, compute a weighted
> random chance (A=1.6 ā†’ p=1, A=2.5 ā†’ pā‰ˆ0.1, with A = the ratio between the
> edge length and the nominal plug (minimum?) width) of omitting a plug for
> that edge.

I don't really understand the purpose of the first refinement, but would the
second refinement help eliminate the odd nipples and cavities that appear on
short edges in the Voronoi-based slicer?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.=
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]