From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2011-12-14 22:27:36
|
On 12/14/2011 03:45 PM, Tait wrote: >> set term foo monochrome (1,0.8,0.5) >> set term foo monochrome red >> [above is equivalent to "set term foo monochrome (1,0,0)"] >> set term foo monochrome sepia >> >> Thoughts? > > My first thoughts are, "is that useful?" "is it necessary?" Don't know. Could be to a small percentage of people, but if it is an easily implemented thing then perhaps it is worth making the feature available. I searched for some examples of sepia tone. Here are a few: http://akvis.com/en/coloriage-tutorial/examples/sepia-photo.php http://www.pxleyes.com/photography-picture/4bb664349c057/Civita.html http://www.eltonography.com/albums/STANDARD/TCONN.html My point is that I would call the above monochrome, but not greyscale. > But if we do go that route, I see no reason to limit the possibilities > to a linear arithmetic weighted average. If one wants a nonlinear > dependence on one or more of the color channels, the more general > solution would be something like "set term foo monochrom using > ((2.0*$1**2+$2+$3)/(2*255**2+2*255))" or replace 255 with 1.0 if we're > using a 0-1.0 scale instead of 0-255. I am assuming $1, $2, $3 are red, > green, blue respectively. Actually, what you are describing is something different. I was describing the monochrome scale; you are describing the input mapping. Let's see if I can draw a little I/O diagram: ------------ ---------- RGB values | I(R,G,B) | |a_r*mono|--> R or -->| or |--> mono values -->|a_g*mono|--> G Mono values |no mapping| |a_b*mono|--> B ------------ ---------- The formula you have given would be I(R,G,B) in the above diagram. (a_r,a_g,a_b) are the weighting parameters that I was describing. And for greyscale, a_r=1, a_g=1, a_b=1. I think, and I may be wrong, that currently one could apply the formula you are describing at the point of reading data from an image file. Manipulating a_r, a_g, a_b would be possible as well, but with slightly more complex manipulations of input data. Dan |