Talk:Scale-invariant feature transform

Robotics Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

As this page is directly about SIFT, descriptions of GLOH and SURF should be moved to seperate pages. Only brief mentions and links to GLOH & SIFT should be included on this page.

Clarification of Mathematic Variable Meanings

I was just wondering if it would be at all possible to have the meanings of the mathematical symbols referenced as well. For someone who is doing research and attempting to learn what all this means it would be extremely helpful. JRSofty (talk) 11:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Needed

This artricle, about specific image features and image feature extraction, would greatly benefit from an exemplar image and additional descriptive images

Fuzzyeric (talk) 22:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why 0.03?

This page would really benefit from an explanation why this value is chosen.--bb (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no theoretical reason for it to be precisely 0.03. It's there just to filter out features resulting from noise. IMO if you have good data, you could use lower (less restrictive) value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.113.20.80 (talk) 12:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Patented?

What does it mean that the algorithm is patented? You can't use it in a commercial product? How long will that last? Is this controversial? I'd like to see a section in the article that gives details about this. --Singularitarian (talk) 05:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking, it's a bad idea for wikipedia to try to summarize the intellectual property status of ideas. Yes, it has been widely discussed that David Lowe's university got a U.S. Patent based on his work. If you want to know what that means, you need to consult an attorney. It may mean that you can't use the invention in the US; they may also have pending or issued foreign patents. Or they may have let the patent lapse. Or it may be invalid for any of a number of reasons. Or the claims may not apply to the exact algorithm or application that you have. Amateurs like wikipedia writers shouldn't be in the position of trying to assess these things. In the current case, the statement of patent is sourced to some guy's web page, so you don't even know what patent is being referred to. Dicklyon (talk) 05:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While Lowe's work on object recognition is a very valuable contribution to the field of computer vision, a number the ideas and methods used in his work on the SIFT descriptor have also been used by others before his publications or what I would assume his patent application. Tpl (talk) 13:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And that's why it takes a skilled attorney and an expert in the art to go over the claims together and try to figure out what you might or might not want to do if you're worried about infringement. It would be best if wikipedia were silent on all this, in my opinion. Dicklyon (talk) 01:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may require a very good expert or even require more than one expert to give an appropriate description of prior art ... Tpl (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Section "Keypoint descriptor"

What's the meaning of the following sentence? "This step is image closest in scale to the keypoint's scale." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.27.201.116 (talk) 07:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]