Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!occrsh!uokmax!apple!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!mpirbn!p554mve From: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: summary re: amiga, ccd, astronomy image-processing Message-ID: <1160@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de> Date: 5 Sep 90 22:00:08 GMT References: <28827@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <992@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> <28045@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> Reply-To: p554mve@mpirbn.UUCP (Michael van Elst) Organization: Max-Planck-Institut fuer Radioastronomie, Bonn Lines: 47 In article <28045@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes: >The problem is not one of time, it is one of capability. Technical >Image processing hardware and software do exist for the Mac & the >PC. It doesn't exist for the Amiga. I know. I need it very badly. > >One thing I am looking into is using the X11-based image processing >package from Laurence Livermore which is freely-distributable from what >I understand (not sure though). Anyway, I am trying to get enough >money to run it on a Sun via X11 until I get a chance to try and port >it to someone's 24bit 30FPS Framegrabber/framebuffer running native on >the Amiga. If you insist on 24bit 30FPS framegrabber/framebuffer then you're right. There's no such hardware for the Amiga (yet ?). On the other side there's no such application (astronomical image processing) needing that. First of all, image processing is three steps, getting the image, calculating sth out of the image and then show the result. The first needs sth like a framegrabber. Scientific images (at least astronomic ones) are done with CCD cameras. These devices have problems with fast readout, we're using devices with 288x384 pixel resolution and can hardly get more than 8 frames/second without degrading image quality. We're awaiting another camera with 512x512 pixel that can be used for up to 4 frames/second. All data is taken with 8 bit/pixel (maybe 12 bit/pixel in the future). So far with the 30FPS 24bit framegrabber. On the output side you could use a display with 7 or 8 bitplanes and a colorpalette with 24bit (or 8bit grayscale palette). That's more than the Amiga can show but not that far away from a well done HAM display. I agree, it should be better but true color (24bit) isn't needed. Now, the calculating part. Many image calculations can be done with integer arithmetic and there the Amiga is comparable to either MACs or PCs. With other calculations you'll need floating point, and yes, a 486 machine will be faster but is a lot more expensive. (A 386 with a weitek is faster too). But I don't think that you want a personal computer (MAC,PC or Amiga) for these applications. Regards, -- Michael van Elst UUCP: universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."