Slashdot Mirror


Software to Divide an Image Into Discrete Patterns

slashyslashy asks: "My preschooler son is fond of color-by-number pages. We have already exhausted most of the online sites that offer somewhat limited sets of coloring pages that he can print to a paper and color. Besides, most of them offer extremely basic (read boring) sets of simple images (flowers, dinosaurs, etc). We were wondering if we can take any regular picture image and convert it into a pattern suitable (divide up the black and white picture into series of random patterns) for color-by-number pages. Is there any good software that allows converting a picture to a pattern suitable for coloring by numbers? Linux is preferable but Windows is also fine. Thank you."

109 comments

  1. Jesus H Christ by Monkelectric · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just goto the 99 cent store and get him some books. Not everything needs to involve a computer

    --

    Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    1. Re:Jesus H Christ by bcat24 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is Slashdot, a geek site. Of course the submitter could just go to the store and buy some books, but where's the fun in that? Maybe just wants to see if it's possible to do it himself.

    2. Re:Jesus H Christ by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah seriously. You could probably get a book of 100 pages for around $1.00. That's cheaper than printing out the pages on even a laser printer, not even talk about the cost of inkjet printers. Not to mention that it's a lot easier to just pick up a book that's already there then go print something from the computer every time. Although I think the computer would be nice, as it could be used for whichever images he wanted. On a completely unrelated note, he could even encourage him to draw some of his own pictures. I've heard that coloring books are to blame for a lot of kids' poor drawing and lack of art skills. We only ever learn to fill in lines that were already drawn for us. If we never try to draw anything for ourselves, we will never be able to draw anything. Kids will be just as happy with a blank sheet of paper and some crayons as they will with some fancy coloring book. And they'll be much better off because they will be learning a useful skill. Instead of learning to fill in predrawn images with color.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Jesus H Christ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait you mean there are things beyond the computer screen? :O Quick! Someone tell Slashdot!

    4. Re:Jesus H Christ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are those books going to have personal pictures? You know, something a little extra that the family can have fun with. No? That's what I thought.

      Fucking asshole.

    5. Re:Jesus H Christ by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      The reason I originally started programming was that my father, sick of going to the store every day for maze books, implemented Kruskal's algorithm on his Smokestack machine and cranked up the dot matrix. That day was the first day I understood automation.

      Sometimes parents have less-than-obvious reasons.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
  2. Could you at least spell-check the title? by ptbarnett · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's discrete, not discreet.

    1. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would spell checking have prevented that error?

    2. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by bcat24 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Eye halve a spelling chequer,
      It came with my pea sea,
      It plainly marques four my revue
      Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

      Eye strike a key and type a word
      And weight four it two say
      Weather eye am wrong oar write
      It shows me strait a weigh.

      As soon as a mist ache is maid
      It nose bee fore two long
      And eye can put the error rite
      Its rarely ever wrong.

      Eye have run this poem threw it
      I'm shore your pleased two no
      Its letter perfect in it's weigh,
      My chequer tolled me sew.

      (Shamelessly stolen from, umm, who wrote this again?)

    3. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no, these patterns are inconspicuous.

    4. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by reanjr · · Score: 1

      And that is why grammar checkers were created

    5. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by mad.frog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To the bonehead moderators who marked the parent "offtopic" and "troll" --

      what the fuck is wrong with you?

      Offtopic, maybe a little, but geez, it's a grade-school level grammar mistake in the headline, for fuck's sake. The editors deserve to be slapped around for it; they should know better.

      And if you think that proper spelling and grammar are optional, well, I just feel sorry for you.

    6. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by Joe+Decker · · Score: 1

      Even a grammar checker wouldn't catch this, to catch this you need semantic information.

    7. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by arb · · Score: 4, Funny

      If only Slashdot had editors - they could proof-read the submissions and fix errors like this.

    8. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Grammar and spelling are indeed important, but throwing the f-bomb around like you're feeding the chickens isn't a particularly good way to look like someone worth listening to.

      Really? Is everyone on /. suffering from Tourette's Syndrome?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    9. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      These mistakes are not typos or spelling errors. They're brainos. There must be a whole taxonomy of them, matching the mind and brain structures that make them. All the way from pressing the wrong, adjacent key, up to wasting time on Slashdot.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    10. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by mad.frog · · Score: 1

      Depends on your perspective, I guess.

      I find this so-called "f-bomb" to be just another word.

      Your mileage may vary.

    11. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I find it to be a crutch for people who are too lazy to find a real world to express what they are saying.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    12. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by mad.frog · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, "fuck" is, in fact a real word.

      And it did a pretty good job of expression what I was saying, IMHO.

    13. Re:Could you at least spell-check the title? by tetabiate · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you're wrong:

      discreet
      Middle English, from Anglo-French discret, from Medieval Latin discretus

      discrete
      Middle English, from Latin discretus

  3. How discreet do you need them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't care what other people think of my patterns. Yeah, that's right, I'll Fourier transform whatever I damn well please. You prudes can go stuff it.

    1. Re:How discreet do you need them? by shish · · Score: 1

      Are you, by any chance, this guy?

      (If not, I'd still recommend the comic for it's intelligent humour; some of the strips make me think before they let me laugh... (eg))

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    2. Re:How discreet do you need them? by Apro+im · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I almost went into grammar nazi mode to correct your use of "it's" in lieu of "its". However, re-parsing the sentence, I prefer to interpret it as "I'd still recommend the comic, for it's intelligent humour," because it's a construction that needs to be used more often. So, feel duly admonished for leaving out the comma.

    3. Re:How discreet do you need them? by Cocoa+Radix · · Score: 0

      What about that particular construction needs to be used more often? The usage of "for" as a conjunction, or this particular usage of "it's"?

  4. Possible approach... by Sam+Nitzberg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This could be wrong, and it could be like trying to kill an ant with a sledgehammer, but here's a possible approach.
    A program like photoshop with lug-ins and image processing / manipulation capabilities may do the job.

    Scan an image, and using a combination of options such as color-reduction, "mattisify" (or others, e.g. Bas-Relief, etc), etc... may produce an acceptable result.

    Good luck

    Sam

    1. Re:Possible approach... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Informative
      A program like photoshop with lug-ins and image processing / manipulation capabilities may do the job.
      It's called The GIMP. Duh. :)
      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    2. Re:Possible approach... by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      Emboss finds the edges (and turns everything else gray). If you start with "simple"
      enough images (GIFs with large solid polygons, not JPEG photos) then you ought to
      get good results. All that remains is to globally replace the dull gray fill.

      If on Win32, InfranView can do Embossing for you.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
    3. Re:Possible approach... by ceejayoz · · Score: 0, Troll

      Sam Nitzberg said "a program like photoshop", not "a program like smashing your head through a plate glass window"...

    4. Re:Possible approach... by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      Unless you're a professional graphics artist, The GIMP's interface isn't really that bad.

    5. Re:Possible approach... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop spreading FUD.

    6. Re:Possible approach... by CptPicard · · Score: 1

      I would go for an edge-detection method, like a Sobel mask. One might also try to reduce the bit depth to find continuous color areas before doing this, but it may also produce artifacts in the image as such an operation may create blocks that otherwise weren't there.

      Edge-detection usually produces the edge areas in white and others in black, so you will want to negate that image, and perhaps do more bit-depth reduction to get away with the greys. Perhaps a sharpen?

      --
      I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
  5. Are you sure? People could watch you transform... by CFD339 · · Score: 1

    ...they could see through your Blackman Windows. :-) Just a little signal processing humor. I kill me.

    --
    The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
  6. Quite easy to do but time is an issue by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 1

    It's easy to write but no one has done it. First take an image and do a histogram for it. Chose the "n" most common colors with certain restrictions of course. Then simply put a number in the center of the region. Also take the gradient of the image and add it, make em black, and then add to the original to find the borders.

    --

    ----
    Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    1. Re:Quite easy to do but time is an issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It's easy to write but no one has done it. First take an image and do a histogram for it. Chose the "n" most common colors with certain restrictions of course. Then simply put a number in the center of the region. Also take the gradient of the image and add it, make em black, and then add to the original to find the borders.

      There are so many problems with your approach that it isn't even funny. The most glaringly obvious one is "what region are you talking about?". Have you noticed that kids coloring books have generally large continuous esthetic regions ?

  7. Since when are Dinosaurs boring by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I was a kid, Dinosaurs were really cool.

    1. Re:Since when are Dinosaurs boring by keithmo · · Score: 3, Funny
      When I was a kid, Dinosaurs were really cool.

      When I was a kid, they still roamed the Earth.

    2. Re:Since when are Dinosaurs boring by eam · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Since when are Dinosaurs boring?

      Jurassic Park III

  8. Quick by labratuk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Open inkscape. Drag image in. Select imported image. Go Path -> Trace bitmap. You'll probably want to use the 'multiple scanning' options. Probably with fewer than the default 8 scans. Select created vectors. Open the fill & stroke dialog and set it to 'no fill' and a plain black stroke.

    As always, you'll want to play with parameters to get good results.

    --
    Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    1. Re:Quick by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      Better to use the program that's based off of. Would mean you could process a few hundred images at a time, in batch mode at the command line. Forget what the name of it is, but it's on sourceforge, and the name of it (with credits) are in the dialog.

    2. Re:Quick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      potrace perhaps? I could be wrong. In any case potrace will also do what is needed from the commandline.

  9. Trace porn first, then colour it in. by acidrain · · Score: 2, Funny

    The kid could just trace regular porn you print out, and then color it in. Then he would have two different things to do, *and* and he'd be learning what boy and girl parts are for.

    --
    -- http://thegirlorthecar.com funny dating game for guys
    1. Re:Trace porn first, then colour it in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't pedophiles an awefully big word for an 8 year old?

    2. Re:Trace porn first, then colour it in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly the above poster is more retarded than your standard 8-year-old, because any 8-year-old would spell "awfully" correctly.
      Thanks for trying, anyway.

    3. Re:Trace porn first, then colour it in. by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      And you'd have to be discreet about it, because forming porn into discrete patterns for your kids is something that you generally don't want people to know about.

      So, is discreet a common synonym for discrete worldwide? They're two separate things here in .au

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    4. Re:Trace porn first, then colour it in. by Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Funny
  10. Saving Money by WindozeSux · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you want to save money and have a picture of anything you want, you could draw one for him or encourage him to be creative to make his own. I always liked being creative when I was younger(and I still do).

    --
    Fallout 3 will suck.
  11. Adobe Streamline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is the program you want :P that + Illustrator
    --
    Adobe Streamline takes a raster image, and segments it into vector regions of color; you then would open up Illustrator and set all the color regions to black border and invisible center. That should do the trick :) This is standard stuff btw in any sort of image process programming, and there are better programs than adobe streamline (new algorithms for image segmentation). In fact, 99.0% sure there is probably already a plugin for Adobe that does your "coloring book" type conversion in one step.

  12. Sorry, don't know any current titles by The_Laughing_God · · Score: 1

    There used to be some jigsaw puzzle generators that allowed you to specify basic types of shapes, which might obscure the picture you are "jigsawing" enough to entertain a preschooler.

  13. Google it by quaker5567 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Search Google for "color by numbers software" http://www.stoik.com/hobby/Color_By_Number/ Is it really that hard?

    1. Re:Google it by pixelfood · · Score: 3, Informative

      I downloaded the free trial of this product, and the company was either brave or stupid to offer a free trial.

    2. Re:Google it by dolmen.fr · · Score: 1

      I do not see any numbers in the resulting image on the home page.
      It doesn't seem to be more advanced than what you can do with "detect edges" feature in your favorite paint program.

  14. FLASH!!...BWAH..He'll save everyone of us... by buddahfool · · Score: 1

    If you have the macromedia suite and basic knowledge of flash you can. (Not the easiest or cheapest way to go but it works...)

    In Macromedia Flash you can Trace Bitmap and it will tranform it to a vector image. Select each color piece, remove the fill and add a stoke color (to give it a border around it.) Add numbers and you are done, happiness!!!

  15. image magick by blackcoot · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://imagemagick.org/ is free, runs on most any platform you'd ever case to use, and implements fuzzy c-means for image segmentation (which basically turns regular photos into "coloring book" versions of themselves). the c-means segmentation may be a bit too coarse for what you want to do. in that case, implementing a mean-shift segmenter (google for comaniciu and meer) will probably do a nice job. hope this helps!

    1. Re:image magick by slashkitty · · Score: 1

      I was just going to suggest this. You can even map all the colors to a new color scheme if you want. You could choose the exact number of colors you'd like to use. It's also very fast and scriptable.

      --
      -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
    2. Re:image magick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean all those coloring books I grew up with were created with the aid of technology approaching rocket science?

      Or does this simply mean that, Coloring books are where aging ex-Photoshoppers go to die?

  16. Two Options... by WhyCause · · Score: 4, Informative

    First, The Gimp makes something like this pretty easy. Open an image and go to 'Image -> Mode -> Indexed...', select the Generate Optimized Palette, and select the number of colors you want to use (10 might last your son 5 minutes, 200 might last him four years). Turn dithering off and hit OK. Next, go to 'Image -> Mode -> RGB' to switch it back to RGB color, then go to 'Filters -> Artistic -> Cartoon...', tweak the settings (Mask radius=10 and Percent black=1.0 seem to work), and hit OK. With these two, I was able to get a 'completed-looking' color-by-numbers image from a photo in about 10 seconds. The rest is up to you (I would start by selecting by color, getting the black outlines, and copying them into a new layer. Add in numbers and a legend, and you're good to go). If you want to get fancy, you could use some python-jitsu and whip up some script-fu to do it automagically.

    Second, you can keep it hardcore and use a program like NIH Image (or its PC counterpart, ScionImage) and use a procedeure called thresholding to get different levels of black and white from an image. The program is scriptable, and if you google around enough (or poke through the sample scripts) you might be able to hack something together pretty easily. I've used this software to track points glued onto soft tissues (ligaments), and if I recall correctly, it was fairly easy to get it to do this sort of thing (i.e., Biomedical Engineering undergrads were able to get it to work). N.B. This is a serious research-level program, so it is not super user-friendly. I also doubt you'll find anything in the help forums if you search for color-by-number. Search instead for thresholding.

    The first option is likely to be waaay easier than the second.

    1. Re:Two Options... by Chalex · · Score: 1

      NIH Image has been superseded by ImageJ. And am I really the only one who knows the definitions of discreet and discrete?????

    2. Re:Two Options... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      No, but you're in the minority.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    3. Re:Two Options... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...The Gimp makes something like this pretty easy....

      Nothing about The Gimp is easy.
  17. Photoshop! by Peganthyrus · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's called Photoshop.

    1. image->adjustments->posterize
    2. filter->stylize->find edges
    3. image->adjustments->desaturate
    4. image->adjustments->levels, pull the leftmost triangle all the way to the right

    You can skip the first step, but then it'll be reeeeally complex.

    You might also want to scale your images up a lot before processing them.

    Or you could use autotrace tools like Streamline, or the "LiveTrace" feature built into Illustrator.

    Or you could pop up another layer over it and trace the image by hand, then turn off the original image layer and print it out.

    Or, yeah, you could just go buy some coloring books, they're reeeeeeally cheap!

    --
    egypt urnash minimal art.
    1. Re:Photoshop! by Heir+Of+The+Mess · · Score: 0
      No this won't work for the ask slashdotter, as they will need to reduce the picture to the colors of the pencils /textas / crayons the child has. Same with any other image processing software that follows the steps you have outlined. It's close though, just need to refine the first step.

      I guess the person could write their own software, hell I'm tempted to write it myself as I have an hour free. You need to have a list of colors available to the child, and then reduce all the colors in the picture by closest match down to those selected colors. Then you follow the other steps you have listed which simulates doing a boundary trace around each color region, then you need to get the computer to put a number inside each region, you add a legend for the numbers and you are there.

      --
      Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
    2. Re:Photoshop! by swillden · · Score: 1

      It's called Photoshop.

      Or you can use the same steps with the GIMP, and save yourself $600, and run it on Linux.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Photoshop! by Joe+Decker · · Score: 1

      If you can get the set of crayon colors into a color table file (I suspect it's pretty easy), you can do the conversion into that range of colors with a conversion into indexed color mode with that custom color table. You may need to convert in and out of indexed mode if some of the filters or other ops don't operate on indexed color images.

    4. Re:Photoshop! by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Or you could use Photoshop Elements, which only costs $90 and isn't nearly as painful to use as GIMP's brain-dead interface. (Especially on OS X, where GIMP is a X11 app.)

    5. Re:Photoshop! by swillden · · Score: 1

      Or you could use Photoshop Elements, which only costs $90 and isn't nearly as painful to use as GIMP's brain-dead interface.

      To each his own, I suppose. I vastly prefer the GIMP's interface over Photoshop's.

      (Especially on OS X, where GIMP is a X11 app.)

      I use the GIMP on OS X all the time. It doesn't look like everything else on the desktop, but it works just fine. It's certainly not a difference worth $90 to me.

      And the requested platform was Linux, which Elements doesn't support.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  18. Color By Number Software by Feezle · · Score: 1, Redundant

    This program is supposed to be able to convert photos to color by number pictures, suitable for paint, crayon, etc. I haven't tried it, but it does have a free trial and is $19.95 to buy. http://www.stoik.com/hobby/colorbynumber.htm

    1. Re:Color By Number Software by Feezle · · Score: 1
      O.K., I had my filtering level set too high, so I'll label my previous post redundant.


      In my defense, I think the original poster was looking for advice about software. After reading a lot of self-righteous pontification from various paragons of parenting wisdom and virtue, I was in a mad rush to help the O.P. find the requested software.

  19. It's called "image segmentation" by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    I don't know of particular packages, but try searching google for "image segmentation" programs. Most of it would be in scientific papers and such, but some of them usually have demo programs. You could also try searching for "paint by numbers".

    Wait, I think I found one. http://sharewareconnection.com/color-by-number.htm
    Good luck.

  20. Beat Me :) by pavon · · Score: 1

    I'll add to the parent by pointing out that if you go into Filter->Blur->Selective Gaussian Blur, with radius of 5-10 and Max Delta of around 92-128, before converting to index mode then you will end up with bigger-rounder shapes, like what you normally see in a color-by number. Afterwords, the easiest way to get rid of the color and be left with only the black outline is to go into Image->Colors->Threshold, and slide the left slider almost all the way to the left.

  21. pimpin' aint easy by weierstrass · · Score: 3, Informative

    >It's easy to write but no one has done it.

    It's actually, both mathematically and computationally, a very difficult problem.
    Image Segmentation
    I'm sure if you know how to do it, and write a nice paper, those folks will be very interested though..

    A tip: most things that are obvious problems that 'no one has done' are actually quite difficult if you think about them for more then 10 seconds.

    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'
    1. Re:pimpin' aint easy by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      From the linked page:

      A central problem, called segmentation, is to distinguish objects from background

      It's for a kid's colouring book. I don't think it has to be that accurate.

    2. Re:pimpin' aint easy by SlickMcSly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem is in provide a discreet definition for subjective and inuitive judgements. I work my own computer vision program as a hobby, and the biggest hurdle is in defining what exactly is a "thing." Take a scene of a park. The hills may have soft shadows around their curves, where does the light green end and the dark green begin when the border is blurred across 50 pixels? What about rational constructs such as a tree? Abstractly it would just be a field of green with bushy edges, but in actuallity you'll have 1000s of leaves in different positions and orientations leading to many contrasting colors. A raw measurement of color would yield several small fields of varying shades of green. Intelligence is required to properly segment an arbitrary image. Either in the program's ability to recognize context or in the user's choice of picture. Ppl don't realize just how difficult seemingly simple things like sight really are because the mind is a massively parallel processor that learns by example, whereas a computer is a linear device that requires exact specification. From my experience, I've learned that there will always be scene ambiguous enough to too fool a computer and even a human (e.g. optical illusions). What is necessary to teach a computer to see isn't an accurate definition of a "thing" (there will never be one), it's experience. Teaching a computer THAT is a whole 'nother story. Regarding simple segmentation for color-by-numbers, it's best to fool around in your (scriptable) editor of choice looking for the sequence of steps that would do the job manually. (plenty of edge detection plugins around) Then automate that process and only select pictures that suit that process. It took billions of years under constant threat of death for our vision to evolve to what it is today, then many years more before we can utilize it (colored rings, round pegs in square holes). Rather than wait for computer scientists to reinvent the eye, limit your expectation and simplify the problem.

    3. Re:pimpin' aint easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a difficult problem to do it for classification, but to actually find the edges of an image and determine what colors are in there is a trivial process - it has been since the sixties. All you need to do is make a color histogram to find out the top n colors. Then, you perform some sort of edge detection. Then, you flood fill all surrounded areas (think connected components) with white. Then print.

      Nobody has made a nice software package for it because it's not something there's much demand for, but I think it's an excellent idea.

    4. Re:pimpin' aint easy by nikolag · · Score: 1

      As always we do tend to write about what we know, not about what someone asked us.

      Therefore, I am going to do the same.
      Segmentation in "need pictures for my kid" and "medical use" are way different. While procedures described above (Gimp, Photoshop,...) work fine, detection and use parts of 2D/3D/4D datasets in medical and similar purpouses is way more complex. Today, You can see nice images from big vendors of medical equipment (Siemens, GE, Phillips, Toshiba, Hitachi,...) but all of the images that You can get are fruits of trained eyes and hands. And it took them quite some time and processor power to do it.

      So, for coloring book, stick to Gimp, and You fingers.

      And, no I have not used spellchecker.

      Stay simple.

      --
      Doing a good job is like spilling coffee on a dark suit, you feel warm all over, but nobody notices.
    5. Re:pimpin' aint easy by 1iar_parad0x · · Score: 1

      Yeah, when I read the headline "divide an image into discrete patterns", I was reminded of the 'Applied Probability Course' offered by ArsDigita.org. One of the lecturers appearantly did a PhD thesis on this topic. So, I was kind of impressed that some father would be interested in going to such lengths for his kid. (IIRC, there were only 5 lectures for the course, so you could certainly watch them if your interested in this subject.)

      Tip: Most 'hard' problems have really nifty approximate solutions that are good enough for most applications (i.e. problems not in AI/automation/verification).

      P.S. I think the algorithm using a 'histogram of top N colors' is pretty cool for a automated paint-by-number pattern generator. Seems like that could be a cool perl hack. Sure, you might have to throw a way some of the more 'complicated' images that have too many shades of a color (or other similar low probability scenarios). Maybe you could examine the difference in RGB values of colors in the pallete and examine the frequency in which these colors are used.

      --
      What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean....
  22. Correction by pavon · · Score: 1

    Oops, that should have been Layers->Colors->Threshold.

    Also I realized that the cartoon filter may be troublesome if one of the indexed colors in your picture is black. Here is an alternate procedure:

    * Filter : Blur : Selective Gaussian Blur, with radius of 5-10 and Max Delta of around 16-128 (depending on how textured image is)
    * Image : Mode : Index, with Generate Optimum Palette of 5 - 20 colors
    * Image : Mode : RGB
    * Filters : Edge-Detect : Sobel (vertical and horizontal)
    * Layers : Colors : Invert
    * Layers : Colors : Threshold, move black slider all the way to the right.

  23. Emboss by mnmn · · Score: 1

    Or the Adobe Element allows contrast search or something similar where it brings up the lines. In Emboss, you can further contrast the image to make it black n white. That should work. If you arent happy with the think boundary lines the elements tool (pretty sure theres something similar in linux) will give you sharp lines that you can contrast more. Of course only certain images will work, not everything.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  24. Bitmap to Vector by Joebert · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anyone know how Flashes bitmap to Vector translations work ?

    Maybe Illustrator.

    Vecotrization seems the way to go.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    1. Re:Bitmap to Vector by fluppeteer · · Score: 1

      It was my first thought, too. Xara (Xtreme/X1/X/Studio/Artworks) has a similar function. Not sure whether it's in the Xara XL Linux beta.

      As with the other suggestions: trace the image (with a fairly large colour threshold, and possibly quite a lot of smoothing and de-noising), then select the whole result and give it a finite line width (depends on the size of the image, but not "thin") and no fill colour. The benefit of the tracing route is that - because the result is a vector - you can make a nice smooth outline from a pretty low res image. It might be a bit "hairy", though - you may have to clean up the result a bit (if you want to look at it closely; a thick line might hide the problems).

      HTH.

      --
      Fluppeteer

  25. Potrace plus some stuff by toothfish · · Score: 3, Funny

    Peter Selinger's Potrace could probably be a good start. He links to a dude who uses Potrace in conjunction with a few other tools to create stained glass. He also links to one of my projects, although he calls it pocopo instead of pacopo. I don't think that pacopo is what you're looking for although it may give you some ideas.

    cheers
    p

  26. Edge detection by trewornan · · Score: 1

    I think what you need is an edge detection algorithm of some kind. Try FILTERS.

  27. Inkscape by Announcer · · Score: 1

    Downloaded it and tried it. What is a "Pango" Error? It said something about fonts, too, and promplty crashed. I couldn't get it to open at all.

    --
    Willie...
    1. Re:Inkscape by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 1
      Downloaded it and tried it. What is a "Pango" Error? It said something about fonts, too, and promplty crashed. I couldn't get it to open at all.

      Get it from you distributor (Ubuntu, debian ,gentoo, SuSE or whatever.) Pango is a font managing system GTK uses, so the errors are probably related.

      Here it runs perfectly (Kubuntu). Awsome program... with the pace GIMP has these days, and Inkscape, and Blender.... all I need is the abilility to draw :)

      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    2. Re:Inkscape by Announcer · · Score: 1

      I'm using Windows 98SE over here... and it was the Windows version I downloaded. I didn't see anything about it specifically requiring XP or anything. Oh well. I uninstalled it.

      --
      Willie...
  28. GIMP does it in two steps. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Or, yeah, you could just go buy some coloring books, they're reeeeeeally cheap!

    Cheap but not free, like the GIMP. So, let's try what you just did with five thousand dollars worth of software.

    1. Get an interesting image (work warning!) with a right click "edit with Gimp" from your favorite browser.
    2. Filters>Artistic>Cartoon. Adjust to the level of black you want.
    3. Layers>Colors>Posterize. Choose the number of colors that suits you.

    Woops, now it's just a cartoon that's already been colored. Well, you get the idea.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:GIMP does it in two steps. by j_peeba · · Score: 1

      So, let's try what you just did with five thousand dollars worth of software.

      Photoshop is definitely worth five thousand dollars but luckily it only costs around 600$ ;)

    2. Re:GIMP does it in two steps. by ipfwadm · · Score: 1

      Woops, now it's just a cartoon that's already been colored. Well, you get the idea.

      At least you recognize that what you accomplished in two steps is not the same thing as what the OP accomplished in four. He took the color out. You didn't. I bet I can make the GIMP do in 1 step something that takes Photoshop a dozen, as long as they're two different things.

      And as another poster mentioned, Photoshop isn't anywhere near 5 grand. In fact, the OP's method can be done with Elements, which comes free with a lot of cameras.

    3. Re:GIMP does it in two steps. by willyhill · · Score: 0
      Well, you get the idea.
      No... no, I don't. You "proved" that it's faster to do something with the GIMP that is completely unrelated to the OP's point. Did you have something else to add?
      --
      The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
    4. Re:GIMP does it in two steps. by Peganthyrus · · Score: 1

      You're off by an order of magnitude; Photoshop's list price is $650. You're also not done!

      --
      egypt urnash minimal art.
    5. Re:GIMP does it in two steps. by zCyl · · Score: 1

      >> Woops, now it's just a cartoon that's already been colored. Well, you get the idea.
      > At least you recognize that what you accomplished in two steps is not the same thing
      > as what the OP accomplished in four. He took the color out. You didn't.

      Okay, how about:

            - Filters>Artistic>Cartoon. Adjust to the level of black you want.
            - Layers>Colors>Threshold. Set the number on the left equal to 1.

      And for better quality, it helps on some dark or noisy images if you first increase the brightness, or use a selective blur as mentioned elsewhere.

  29. Software to Divide an Image Into Discreet Patterns by Kuku_monroe · · Score: 0
    "Software to Divide an Image Into Discreet Patterns"
    I seriously thought this was an article about a new kind of anti-copy protection technique for copyrighted images. Maybe im just (finally) getting paranoic after all these years
    --
    //WR
  30. ImageJ by Sometimes_Rational · · Score: 2, Informative

    I would bet that ImageJ would do the job for you.

    It is multi-platform, fairly fast and has a number of plugins and macros. If you find a combination of operations that work well, you can save it as a macro that a kid could probably handle on their own.

    It is available at http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/index.html.

    The website is rudimentary, but the program itself is fun to mess with.

    --
    Warning: The intelligence of this post may be larger than it appears.
  31. Or ... by dna_(c)(tm)(r) · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure that can be done, but ImageMagick is a set of command line tools that allow you to do amazing things.

    But the frst part could be Edge detection, from there you're on your own...

  32. another one.. by weierstrass · · Score: 1

    think again

    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'
  33. Re:Potrace ... used by Inkscape by pbhj · · Score: 1

    Last time I looked potrace was used by Inkscape for it's "trace bitmap" feature. I've had success vectorising images by doing "posterise" color (sic) reduction in GIMP, possibly doing some image smoothing too (oilify works quite well for this) - then importing into Inkscape and doing a trace.

    HTH

  34. Think outside the box by Anomolous+Cowturd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Print the image out faintly, perhaps in grayscale, and let him trace and fill in the image himself. Computers just aren't that good at recognising the boundaries of objects in pictures; a preschooler could probably do a better job than a computer and it'll make it less "boring" for him too...

    --
    Software patents delenda est.
  35. Check out 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The best course would be to use vectorized images, but it can be tedious work drawing elaborate images (which is what you seem to be interested in) and it may not be all that easy to find such images on online.

    My suggestion is that you visit some online forum/board where people regularly vectorize images. The only place I know is 4chan. Check the cute, anime wallpapers, and anime threads. There's usually people requesting (and supplying) vectorized images there. Try asking some of the people to send you the vectorized images.

    You can always try to start doing some Papercraft. There's some nice stuff on the pepakura section.

    If you visit 4chan.org, try to keep an open mind. Or at least, don't visit the other boards (such as "sexy beautiful women" and hentai, and especially not4chan.org).

    1. Re:Check out 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol 4chan...

  36. May involve more effort then you want to put in by SteveDob · · Score: 1

    but why not go Tracing Paper -> Scanner -> Printer

    If the original images are starting off on the computer, just put an extra initial Printer stage in there.

  37. Use GIMP or Photoshop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just open any JPEG - reduce the color palette to 16 colors or so, and then emboss the image to get lines. Print and color. I do it for my kids all the time.

    Look Grampa has Red hair! Fun times.

  38. you are wrong by weierstrass · · Score: 1

    >to actually find the edges of an image and determine what colors are in there is a trivial process
    bullshit.

    >Then, you perform some sort of edge detection.
    that simple, eh?

    >it's not something there's much demand for
    crap.

    anyone who disagrees with this is welcome to perform the task without manual adjustments on one nontrivial, standard digital photograph and post the results and their method as a reply.

    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'
    1. Re:you are wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this?

      NB: I'm not the original AC you're arguing with. Anyway, some years ago I saw a video where a japanese scientist presented real-time image segmentation. It was quite cool, video looked like cartoons or animated comics.

    2. Re:you are wrong by winnabago · · Score: 1
      Hey, these days automatic rotoscoping is pretty common to see, in everything from insurance commercials to feature films. It's not real-time, but with enough processing muscle, it could be. They used something called Rotoshop.


      And oh what it does for Winona Ryder's figure!

      --
      Dammit Otto, you have lupus.
    3. Re:you are wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is the result of a simple 10-digit based algorithm. Please critique the "edge detection" performance - http://www.goatce.sx/

  39. Google cross stitch image maker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You'll find that there are quite a few programs and websites out there that will breakdown an image into areas of certain colors. They work really nicely. You'd just need to convert the cross stitch thread numbers to colors for your pre-schooler.

  40. Don't get yourself sued by n3v · · Score: 1

    We are talking royalty free images here of course, correct?

  41. Might as well over-engineer the solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You already have a problem that completely doesn't need to be solved using computers. You might as well go with the enterprise leaders,
    Visual Learning Systems (recently bought by Overwatch) http://www.featureanalyst.com/feature_analyst.htm/ and
    Definiens http://www.definiens.com/

  42. I think Gimp can do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi, I think Gimp can do it. If I remember correctly, there's an option in Gimp to "detect border" in an image, and the resulting new image would be black and white.

    I did not use that option often but I think I can come out with the results you want. If you want me to help you more in details please reply to this message.

    Have a good day.