From: Frank v. M. <F.v...@in...> - 2000-04-26 21:25:55
|
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 07:25:16PM -0400, Robert L Krawitz wrote: > I'd like something bigger than that. 23x23 is only 469, and that > doesn't give enough resolution to handle very pale tones. 73x73 is > smaller than ideal also (5329), but it's in the right ballpark. The > matrices currently in use are 128, 81, and 125. A matrix of size 121 > (picked out of thin air) would take about 3 weeks to calculate, then. Sorry for this dumb question but: you mean the matrix or any picture produced with it? Has it been tried to fill such a matrix with the output of a random number generator? There are a lot of pretty good RNGs. -- Frank |