Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ucbvax!vmsa.technion.ac.il!ners001
From: ners001@vmsa.technion.ac.il
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Comp.Image.Processing (not HOW/WHY but WHEN?)
Message-ID: <263@vmsa.technion.ac.il>
Date: 26 Dec 88 21:00:45 GMT
References: <172@vmsa.technion.ac.il> <589@wasatch.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 72

isy.liu.se> <2195@eos.UUCP>
Organization: Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa Israel
Lines: 67
Apparently-To: post-usenet@ucbvax.berkeley.edu


> In article <1988Dec19.141246.3075@isy.liu.se> ingemar@carola.UUCP () writes:
>>Computer Graphics, Image Processing, Computer Vision and AI are different,
>>related subjects. People like me, who are mainly interested in IP and CV,
>>find very little of interest in comp.graphics or comp.ai(.vision).
>>So where should such things be posted? Or are there no such postings?
>
> In article <2195@eos.UUCP>, eugene@eos.BITNET writes:
> My background is image processing for remote sensing.  That's not AI,
> that's not vision, that's not synthetic image generation.  Rather than
> propose a new group, JUST POST what you have to say.  What makes a
> newsgroup is what gets posted, not what gets read.
>           .....  Let's see you stimulate some discussion.

SET STIMULATE=ON

Since my original posting about a month ago (where the subject of a new
group comp.image.processing was started), I have received about 20 very
positive letters and I also heard from 2 people who thought that this
was an idea before its' time.

One negative person suggested we use comp.ai.vision (obviously because
it is never used for anything else - I have been looking at comp.ai.vision
for a *long* time and I never see *anything* posted there).  Using the
same logic we could decide to use any of a number of *low* frequency
groups.

All the positive views came from people who work in IP but not in CG,
AI or even CV, but still have to wade through all the articles in THIS
group to find the 1 in a 100 gem that has anything to do with what they
are doing.  I personally am interested in Spatially Variant Maximum
Entropy Restoration of Coplaner Laminagraphic Images: This is 100%
Image Processing.  It has nothing to do with Computer Graphics, Artificial
Intelligence or Computer Vision.  Should I post my ideas/questions to
comp.graphics? comp.ai.vision.? sci.math? sci.physics? comp.information.theory?
or just misc.misc?   Why shouldn't a subject as broad as Image Processing
have its' own news group?

Now, we really should deal with the basic question -- What comes first,
the newsgroup or the need for a news group.   The logic here is very simple:

        1) A new newsgroup should be formed when the activity in an existing
           group becomes so heavy that a separate group can be set up to
           deal with one of the major sub-topics in that group.

        2) Most people who work in IP (but not in CG) probably don't even
           look at comp.graphics.  Since they don't read it, they don't
           post to it.  Since they don't post,  there will never be a
           "need" (see 1 above) to start a new group to deal with
           Image processing.

All of this discussion leads to 2 possibilities:

        1) We forget the whole thing.
                 (Reading News is a waste of time anyways)

        2) I try to adapt somebody's ray tracer to do Limited Angle
           Multi-Energy Maximum Entropy Tomographic Reconstruction
           and try to convince myself that I *am* actually doing
           Computer Graphics and not Image Processing.

Now that I've stroked a lot of fur the wrong way, I hope that some more
positive discussions will be continued on this topic :--)

Benjamin Cohen
NDT/QA Image Processing Lab
ners001@vmsa.technion.ac.il