This forum is disabled, please visit https://forum.opencv.org
 | 1 | initial version |
that's not a bug, but a programmer error, aka : your fault.
if the Mat's type is CV_8U, you have to use
image.at<uchar>(row,col);
easy to get wrong, so rather try to avoid per-pixel access at all.
| | 2 | No.2 Revision |
that's not a bug, but a programmer error, aka : your fault.
if the Mat's type is CV_8U, you have to use
image.at<uchar>(row,col);
easy to get wrong, so rather try to avoid per-pixel access at all.
(a debug build of your program should also have thrown a proper exception here)
| | 3 | No.3 Revision |
that's not a bug, but a programmer error, aka : your fault.
if the Mat's type is CV_8U, you have to use
image.at<uchar>(row,col);
easy to get wrong, so rather try to avoid per-pixel access at all.
(a debug build of your program should also have thrown a proper exception here)
| | 4 | No.4 Revision |
that's not a bug, but a programmer error, aka : your fault.
if the Mat's type is CV_8U, you have to use
image.at<uchar>(row,col);
easy to get wrong, so rather try to avoid per-pixel access at all.
what you're doing is basically like:
image[ (width * y + x) * sizeof(int) ]
and this will get out of bounds easily th the edges, causing undefined behaviour.
| | 5 | No.5 Revision |
that's not a bug, but a programmer error, aka : your fault.
if the Mat's type is CV_8U, you have to use
image.at<uchar>(row,col);
easy to get wrong, so rather try to avoid per-pixel access at all.
what you're doing is basically like:
image[ (width * y + x) * sizeof(int) ]
and this will get out of bounds easily th near the edges, causing undefined behaviour.