Geek Answers Handbook

Pixel Indexing in OpenCV Distance Conversion

I want to use the distanceTransform () function to find the minimum distance from non-zero pixels to zero zeros, and also the position is the closest zero pixel. I call the second version of the function with the labelType flag set to DIST_LABEL_PIXEL. Everything works fine, and I get the distances and indices of the nearest zero pixels.

Now I want to convert the indexes back to pixel locations, and I thought the indexing would look like idx = (row * cols + col) or something like that, but I needed to find out that OpenCV just counts the zero pixels and using this score as an index. So if I get 123 as the index of the nearest pixel, that means the 123rd zero pixel is the closest.

  • How does OpenCV count them? Perhaps in different ways?

  • Is there an efficient way to display indexes in locations? Obviously, I could recount them and keep track of the counts and positions if I know how OpenCV evaluates them, but that seems silly and not very efficient.

  • Is there a good reason to use the indexing they used? I mean, are there any advantages over using absolute indexing?

Thanks in advance.

EDIT:

, , :

Mat mask = Mat::ones(100, 100, CV_8U);
mask.at<uchar>(50, 50) = 0;

Mat dist, labels;
distanceTransform(mask, dist, labels, CV_DIST_L2, CV_DIST_MASK_PRECISE, DIST_LABEL_PIXEL);

cout << labels.at<int>(0,0) << endl;

, 1, , (50,50) ?

+4
1

- , , .

, 2D- , , . , 2D-. , , .

, .

+4

More articles:


All Articles