comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: SMOOTH function for 3D
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: SMOOTH function for 3D [message #46404] Tue, 22 November 2005 10:16
Rick Towler is currently offline  Rick Towler
Messages: 821
Registered: August 1998
Senior Member
IDLmastertobe wrote:
> Thanks, but I also tried doing result = SMOOTH(3Darray,[3,3,3]) and I
> observe no difference. any ideas?

I don't mean to be rude, but how could anyone possibly answer your
question given so little information? SMOOTH works fine on 3d data. I
can easily observe a difference in the data:

IDL> x=randomu(s,3,3,3)*10.
IDL> print, x
7.79008 4.15141 7.48622
1.69548 6.31630 6.84862
7.00782 2.78159 7.85362

5.91996 0.659594 5.77286
8.38353 3.33698 9.03057
7.64424 0.474168 5.77164

3.62966 8.94523 4.11056
9.33464 1.19968 4.66864
5.79112 3.83709 1.43494
IDL> print, smooth(x,3,/edge)
5.31274 5.66250 6.01227
5.21623 5.58725 5.95827
5.11973 5.51200 5.90428

5.42783 5.47206 5.51628
5.41093 5.25468 5.09842
5.39403 5.03729 4.68056

5.54293 5.28162 5.02030
5.60563 4.92210 4.23857
5.66832 4.56258 3.45685

You could do something similar with your data to convince yourself that
SMOOTH is working. Then you would know that your problem lies elsewhere
and you could start looking for other possibilities.

-Rick
Re: SMOOTH function for 3D [message #46418 is a reply to message #46404] Tue, 22 November 2005 01:20 Go to previous message
IDLmastertobe is currently offline  IDLmastertobe
Messages: 54
Registered: June 2004
Member
Thanks, but I also tried doing result = SMOOTH(3Darray,[3,3,3]) and I
observe no difference. any ideas?
Re: SMOOTH function for 3D [message #46423 is a reply to message #46418] Mon, 21 November 2005 23:46 Go to previous message
Bringfried Stecklum is currently offline  Bringfried Stecklum
Messages: 75
Registered: January 1996
Member
IDLmastertobe wrote:
> Hi, i'm working on smoothing 3D data. I can visualize a 3D object base on
> the data and rotate it . I have used SMOOTH function before to smooth 2D
> image and it worked fine. But now when I am using it for 3D as: result =
> SMOOTH(3Darray); and then use the result as my new 3D data, I observe no
> difference when I am visualizing it. It looked just like the original
> unsmoothed function. Does anyone know why? Thank you.
>

The syntax result =SMOOTH(3Darray) is wrong since a second argument is
required which indicates the smoothing width (scalar or vector). For smoothing
a 3D array in each direction the proper call would be, e.g.
result=SMOOTH(3Darray, [2,4,3])
which smoothes the data in the x-direction over two pixels, in y-direction over 4,
and in z-direction over 3 pixels.

regards,

Bringfried Stecklum
Re: SMOOTH function for 3D [message #46431 is a reply to message #46423] Mon, 21 November 2005 10:00 Go to previous message
David Fanning is currently offline  David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
Senior Member
IDLmastertobe writes:

> Hi, i'm working on smoothing 3D data. I can visualize a 3D object base on
> the data and rotate it . I have used SMOOTH function before to smooth 2D
> image and it worked fine. But now when I am using it for 3D as: result =
> SMOOTH(3Darray); and then use the result as my new 3D data, I observe no
> difference when I am visualizing it. It looked just like the original
> unsmoothed function. Does anyone know why?

No, I don't know why. Lousy visualization method would be
my first guess. :-)

Cheers,

David


--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: subscripting arrays
Next Topic: Re: lunch envi function in 'batch mode'

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 13:49:01 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.21881 seconds