<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Computer vision vs human vision, an example</title>
	<atom:link href="http://inperc.com/blog2/index.php/2007/11/25/computer-vision-vs-human-vision-an-example/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://inperc.com/blog2/2007/11/25/computer-vision-vs-human-vision-an-example/</link>
	<description>Computer vision and image analysis for newcomers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:13:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Computer Vision for Dummies &#187; Human vision vs. computer vision, another example</title>
		<link>http://inperc.com/blog2/2007/11/25/computer-vision-vs-human-vision-an-example/comment-page-1/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>Computer Vision for Dummies &#187; Human vision vs. computer vision, another example</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 17:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inperc.com/blog2/2007/11/25/computer-vision-vs-human-vision-an-example/#comment-52</guid>
		<description>[...] Last time we had an image that looked blank and yet Pixcavator was able to detect objects that spelled “Hello!”. The reason was that humans can only recognize about 30 levels of gray while standard image formats have 256. Since the text was in virtually white (254) on white (255) background, it was invisible. This was supposed to illustrate the ability of computer vision to succeed where humans fail. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Last time we had an image that looked blank and yet Pixcavator was able to detect objects that spelled “Hello!”. The reason was that humans can only recognize about 30 levels of gray while standard image formats have 256. Since the text was in virtually white (254) on white (255) background, it was invisible. This was supposed to illustrate the ability of computer vision to succeed where humans fail. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
