This forum is disabled, please visit https://forum.opencv.org

2020-10-13 15:32:36 -0500 | received badge | ● Student (source) |

2020-10-12 09:29:03 -0500 | commented answer | Negative values in filter2D convolution Indeed the output depth was what made the negative values saturate to zero. Using the provided line solved the problem. |

2020-10-12 09:20:36 -0500 | received badge | ● Supporter (source) |

2020-10-12 09:20:33 -0500 | marked best answer | Negative values in filter2D convolution I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm on a .JPG image using OpenCV in Python. For comparison I also created a simple convolution function that slides a kernel over every pixel in the image. However, the results between this 'manual' convolution and cv2::filter2D are quite different as can be seen in the attached picture. The filter2D function (middle row) is very fast compared to my implementation (bottom row) but the results miss some edges. In the attached example, a simple 3x3 horizontal ([121][000][-1-2-1]) kernel is used and we can already see notable differences. This seems to be caused by the filter2D function surpressing negative values. When I flip the kernel, the missing edges are displayed, so the image is equal to the difference between the images in row 2 (cv2) and row 3 (my implementation). Is there an option that allows filter2D to also record negative (or absolute magnitude) values? A simple workaround would be to do convolutions for the kernel and the 180 degrees flipped version and sum the two results, but this will unnecessarily complicate the code. Since I have little ambition to rewrite the filter2D function to suit my needs (since my simple implementation is too slow), I wondered whether there is an official workaround? Regardless of a solution, I think it would be good to update the documentation. A minimal example using a .JPG image |

2020-10-12 09:20:33 -0500 | received badge | ● Scholar (source) |

2020-10-12 09:20:30 -0500 | commented answer | Negative values in filter2D convolution Indeed the output depth was what made the negative values saturate to zero. Using the provided line solved the problem. |

2020-10-12 08:21:36 -0500 | commented question | Negative values in filter2D convolution The image is a JPG, updated code to reflect conversion to np.ndarray() containing only 1 color channel. Results for all |

2020-10-12 08:09:25 -0500 | edited question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Negative values in filter2D convolution I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm on a .JPG image using OpenC |

2020-10-12 07:56:34 -0500 | edited question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Negative values in filter2D convolution I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm on a .JPG image using OpenC |

2020-10-12 07:55:39 -0500 | commented question | Negative values in filter2D convolution The image is a JPG |

2020-10-12 06:45:28 -0500 | commented question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Added code for clarity. |

2020-10-12 06:45:12 -0500 | edited question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Negative values in filter2D convolution I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm using OpenCV in Python. For |

2020-10-12 06:30:28 -0500 | edited question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Unwanted preprocessing in filter2D I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm using OpenCV in Python. For comp |

2020-10-12 06:25:30 -0500 | received badge | ● Editor (source) |

2020-10-12 06:25:30 -0500 | edited question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Unwanted preprocessing in filter2D I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm using OpenCV in Python. For comp |

2020-10-12 05:57:50 -0500 | asked a question | Negative values in filter2D convolution Unwanted preprocessing in filter2D I am playing around with an edge detection algorithm using OpenCV in Python. For comp |

Copyright OpenCV foundation, 2012-2018. Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.