Talk:Scale-space segmentation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article may be too technical for a general audience. Please help improve this article by providing more context and better explanations of technical details to make it more accessible, without removing technical details.

[edit] Link/Reference suggestion

Is this link/reference, on the application of Gaussian Scale Space in microscopy image segmentation, acceptable for this article (owner, self-promotion?) ? Pvosta 11:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The principles of scale space applied to structure and colour in light microscopy http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pvosta/proc_rms.pdf

Since Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, the articles should therefore reference main contributions in the area concerning methods as they are used by other practitioners in the field, and the most important articles that would be referenced in a survey article on the topic, thus articles that are referenced by many other sources. Moreover, I think that the style of referencing should be balanced within an article, such that different subareas of the articles are treated in a uniform manner without extensive bias. Concerning the topic of this article, scale-space segmentation, this matter is a bit more complicated by the fact that the topic is still a research area with many open issues. Sorry to say this, but I'm a bit hesitant towards the proposed article since it would change the scope of the article substantially. It would also imply that a large number of other articles would have to be included for the article to remain balanced. Since I'm a main contributor to this article, however, I don't think that the decision should be taken by a single individual. Others may have complementary views. Tpl 16:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Layman's terms

This article, as it currently stands, needs to be explicated a little bit for the sake of accessibility. ENeville 16:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, it could use some work. I added some figures that might help, but it needs more explanation. Witkin's fundamental work is cast an aside relative to the more complex 2D work. It really should be explained first, since without understanding it the rest can't make any sense. Dicklyon 23:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I added a short bit on the 1D case, and some section headings. Hope it helps. More work could help more. Dicklyon 05:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)