Talk:Digital image processing

Dear Wikipedians, This page is a far cry of what I would expect when I searched for "Digital image processing" I expected to see prose describing how popular image editing programs were used as a virtual digital darkroom. I do my digital image processing to improve composition, crop out extranious areas, remove noise, correct brightness, improve contrast, correct alignment, add dramatic effects, etc. You get the picture.

I would like to flesh out this article, but all of the above does not fit well with what is already there. I edited the page to add one paragraph. Please let me here your views. Phil 22:28, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

I think the digital image editing has more of the information you expected to see. Is there some way of clarifying that this digital image processing article is full of boring theory :-), that people really should click over to digital image editing to get the practical information on how to make their digital photos look better? --DavidCary 23:53, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any difference between processing and editing? If not, a merge and redirect is in order. Alf ^melmac 00:29, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there's a BIG difference. People who does image editing are artists, photographers, or merely hobbysts. They use software (like Photoshop) to perform many tasks, as Phil pointed out. However, there are some other people, mainly engineers, mathematicians, and computer-scientists, who design the algorithms that perform those tasks. Put in other words, image editors USE PhotoShop's features, while image processing guys design those features. So, i doesn't make sense to merge these articles, there are very different tasks, although their names are a bit confussing. --Juan 06:11, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bad sentence

Is this sentence OK?! "Images taken by popular digital cameras often need processing to improve their quality, a distinct advantage digital cameras have over film cameras."

No, it's not OK. I rewrote that bit, and I hope you like it better. Dicklyon 04:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Image Processing?

I don't think so. That page has a much broader scope, with optical, analog, etc. Let's keep them separate. Dicklyon 04:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link appropriate?

Is this link appropriate (link-owner) or is it considered commercial: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pvosta/pcrimg.htm

I removed it because you linked your own stuff, and it leads to info about your CV and consulting; and that host sometimes gives me popup ads. The only time you should link your own stuff is for copies of things that have already been vetted, e.g. via peer review, such as copies of your published articles that you have a right to distribute personally but are otherwise copyrighted. See WP:NOR#Citing_oneself, WP:EL, WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_mirror_or_a_repository_of_links,_images,_or_media_files and m:When_should_I_link_externally. Dicklyon 15:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]