From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-01 17:16:11
Hi Ullrich,
>
> Consequently, the right term is pixel_value, and GIL is halfway right,
> because the associated typedef is already called pixel_value_type.
FWIW it is precisely that what prompted me to suggest renaming pixel<> to
color<>.
That class does not neccesarily represent the "element of the picture" that
we call pixel.
In fact, for a planar image, the class "planar_ref" comes a lot closer to
that purpose, and in that context, the class pixel<> is used to capture a
deep-copy of that pixel's value.
> Calling the concept itself pixel_value would just be consequent,
Since a few people pointed put that the value of a pixel is not neccesarily
a color, I like this suggestion.
Now, off the pixel/color topic.
rom the Quicktime format disccusion: is it possible to supersample (rather
than subsample) an image? That is, to take two or more consequtive pixels in
a row and pretend is just one pixel? I ask because the lack of uniformity in
even/odd pixels in the v210 format could be elegantly solved this way (that
is if IIUC the problem).
Best
Fernando Cacciola