- Our software library provides a free download of Resize Sense 2.3 for Mac. The most recent installer that can be downloaded is 11.9 MB in size. The most popular versions among Resize Sense for Mac users are 2.0, 1.5 and 1.3. Our built-in antivirus scanned this Mac download and rated it as 100% safe. You can set up this app on Mac OS X 10.7.
- Ubuntu 16.04/18.04 LTS (Linux Kernels 4.4, 4.8,4.10, 4.13, 4.15, 4.16., 4.18, 5.0, 5.3) Windows 10 (Build 15063 or later) Windows 8.1. Windows 7. Mac OS (High Sierra 10.13.2) Android 7, 8. On Windows 8.1 hardware frame synchronization is not available for the D400 series. more about Windows 7 release. Non-LTS Ubuntu kernels with.
- Download
This makes perfect sense. We’re starting with index 0, which maps to 0 in the source image, and then steadily moving up by steps of 1/scale = 0.5.But this presents a weird artifact at the end (right edge) of the image. Now we have an extra value on the right which copies the edge value. New Version: All the New Features & Changes in Samsung's One UI 3.0 Update Samsung's Android 10 update goes by the name of One UI 2, as it's the sequel to last year's Android 9-backed One UI. After their early 2019 update finally shook the stigma of TouchWiz, it's important that Samsung follow it up with an equally impactful update for 2020. Resize Sense 2.2 Resize Sense 2.0 Resize Sense 1.5. This utility provides you with a quick and efficient way to resize, crop, rotate, flip, and rename multiple photos at the same time. Resize Sense works with a wide variety of image formats, supports the drag-and-drop action and batch processing, and lets you save output profiles in.
Resize Sense 2 2 0 2
If your download is not starting, click here.
Thank you for downloading 3D Systems Sense from our software portal
The software is distributed free of charge. The download version of 3D Systems Sense is 2.2.0.240. The package you are about to download is authentic and was not repacked or modified in any way by us. The download was scanned for viruses by our system. We also recommend you to check the files before installation.
3D Systems Sense antivirus report
This download is virus-free.This file was last analysed by Free Download Manager Lib 18 days ago.
NOD32
AVIRA
![Sense Sense](https://s4827.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/screenshot-2.jpg)
MCAFEE-GW-EDITION
WebAdvisor
Often downloaded with
- Sena Device ManagerSena Device Manager allows you to manage Sena Bluetooth devices such as..DOWNLOAD
- Solar System 3d GravitatorSolar System 3D Gravitator is an accurate 3D simulator of the solar system..DOWNLOAD
- Solar System - Neptune 3D ScreensaverExplore the Solar System with Neptune 3D screensaver. Imagine yourself a great..DOWNLOAD
- Solar System - Moon 3D ScreensaverThe Moon is now available for closer observation with Moon 3D Screensaver! The..$14.95DOWNLOAD
- Solar System - Earth 3D ScreensaverTry a new space screensaver, a real boon for astronomy lovers. This is the best..$17.95DOWNLOAD
Image resizing is one of the most common image operations available. Imazing 2 2 3 download free. In computer vision applications, it’s used all the time. Traditional algorithms call quite often for operating on image pyramids. Convolutional networks which extract global image features are typically restricted to a fixed input size, which means that most of the time, the original image needs to be resized (or sometimes resized and padded in order to maintain aspect ratio) in order to conform. In per-pixel tasks, like segmentation or keypoint detection, often times the output of a network might need to be resized back to the image resolution to be made use of. Or sometimes, resizing operations are incorporated into the network itself as part of a “decoder” module.
When resizing an image, it’s necesary to adopt an interpolation strategy, as most target indices will be mapped to subpixel values, and the image intensity at that subpixel needs to be interpolated from the pixels surounding its location. In my experience, bilinear interpolation is the most common when resizing images, especially when enlarging the image. (If the resize is within a convolutional network, nearest neighbor is also common, since there will be further processing done anyway by subsequent convolutional layers.) I have found, though, that many libraries that have implementations of bilinear resizing differ in their standards as to how to implement it, and this has been a source of confusion for myself and many others. So let’s take a close look at a few of those relevant to the computer vision community.
First, let’s look at OpenCV, the gold standard for computer vision algorithms. We’ll do a simple test in one dimension to try and see what it does. We’ll start off with a
1x6
“image” (single channel), with each value equal to its x-index and resize it to double the length to 1x12
.This outputs:
As we can see, the edges of the resulting “image” keep the same values as the original. The step value between pixels is 0.5, which is to be expected when scaling by two, except for the first and last steps, which are steps of 0.25. What’s going on?
Well, OpenCV assumes that when you resize an image, you don’t really just want a scaling of the original indices. If that was the case in our example, for instance, the index
4
of the result would map to index 2
of the source image and would have value 2
. Instead, as we saw, it has value 1.75
. Why doesn’t OpenCV want to scale the indices directly? Let’s see what happens when we do that with the warpAffine
function. Using that function, we can apply any affine function to the image indices, and of course that includes a simple scaling:The result:
This makes perfect sense. We’re starting with index
0
, which maps to 0
in the source image, and then steadily moving up by steps of 1/scale = 0.5
. But this presents a weird artifact at the end (right edge) of the image. Now we have an extra value on the right which copies the edge value. This is because index 10
in the target maps to 5
in the source image, which is the edge of the source image, but then we still have another index to fill, 11
, which maps to 5.5
. So we’ve moved over the edge of the image and rely on an interpolation border strategy to fill it in; in this case, I chose border reflection. But because of our zero-indexing, we only end up interpolating over the edge on the right side, but not on the left side; so the left side looks normal, whereas on the right side you get that weird artifact. Here’s a simple diagram to show what’s going on:The dots on top represent the pixel values in the source image and the dots on bottom represent where the pixel values will be in the target image. The dotted lines show where in the source image those bottom dots will be interpolated from. As you can see, there’s that awkward target pixel on the right side just hanging over the edge.
That’s why OpenCV assumes in the
resize
function that you don’t want the straight-forward index scaling. Instead, what it does is it considers the value of a pixel in the image to be the value at the “center” of the pixel. You have to think of a pixel as having an “area” of width and length one. That is, if the top left pixel of an image has value 255
, then that value of 255
fills the area between 0
and 1
, and we take the “center” of that pixel, (0.5, 0.5)
as its real index. Effectively, we’re shifting the indices of the image by 0.5
. Here’s a corresponding diagram:Each pixel now inhabits an “area” represented by the squares. The zero point is considered to be on the left-most edge of the first square so that the first pixel value is actually located at
0.5
. OpenCV assumes that you want the left edge of the output image, at 0
to correspond or align with the left edge of the source image, at its0
. And the same on the right side; in this case, that means that the right edge of the target image, at 12.0
should align with the right-most side of the source image at 6.0
. But those values are past the “real” edge of the image, as in actual indices, they correspond to -0.5
and 11.5
in the target image, and -0.5
and 5.5
in the source image.So, given an index
i
in the target image, to map it to an index in the source image, we need to shift our index by 0.5
, then scale it, then shift back by 0.5
again. Let’s try it in the form of a python lambda
and see if it matches the OpenCV result.That prints the following:
As we can see, now, instead of going over the edge by 0.5 on just the right-hand side, we’re going over the edge on both sides equally by
0.25
. OpenCV employs a reflection border mode, so the edges can be changed to the following:And in fact, this is exactly what
cv2.resize
returned above.Most libraries that I’ve encountered implement one of the above two standards. Either the direct index scaling (which I believe is what
PIL
does) or the OpenCV-style “shift-and scale” approach (which is also followed by scikit-image
).Resize Sense 2 2 0 3
Suppose, though, that you want to incorporate bilinear resizing (which is differentiable) in a convolutional network. This is done, for example, in the DeepLabv3+ model for segmentation. (I recommend this excellent post about visualizing the difference between increasing resolution in convolutional networks via “deconvolution” layers and via resizing followed by standard convolution layers.) This can be done in Tensorflow with the
tf.image.resize_bilinear
function. Let’s see what it does on our toy example from above.This prints out as follows:
Resize Sense 2 2 00
We’ve seen this before. This is direct index scaling. It’s what
cv2.warpAffine
does when you give it a scaling transform. But it’s not what cv2.resize
does. And, most probably, it’s not what you want your network to do when it’s resizing feature maps. To avoid this behavior, Tensorflow provides an option called align_corners
(which defaults to False
) as an argument to this function. Let’s check it out:This time, we get:
It turns out that Tensorflow, like OpenCV, tries to align the left and right edges of the input and output images. But, unlike OpenCV, they don’t consider the pixel values to represent the “center” of the pixel areas, i.e. they don’t shift the index values by a half in their mapping. Here’s what it looks like in one of our dot diagrams.
Tensorflow is aligning the target’s
0
with the source’s 0
on the left, and also the right-most target index, 11
, is being aligned with the right-most source index, which is 5
. So, actually, in this align_corners
mode, Tensorflow is still scaling the indices without shifting, but they’re just changing the expected scale value. To scale from size 6
to size 12
like in our example is not scaling by a factor of 2
, but rather by a factor of 11/5 = 2.2
. You can think of it as the area or “length” of the source image being scaled to the area or length of the target. In out case, the target may have 12 pixel values, or “points”, but there are only 11 “units of length” between the points. The same for the source image - there are only 5 “units”. So the scale factor becomes 11/5.This
align_corners
is likely closer to what you want if you’re resizing the feature maps in your network. However, there still doesn’t seem to be a way to imitate OpenCV’s resizing in Tensorflow.To take advantage of Tensorflow’s
align_corners
mode, a nice approach when enlarging an image is to make it so that output_size-1
is divisible by input_size-1
. That way, the scale factor becomes an integer, and this minimizes the amount of output pixels interpolated from subpixels in the source image. To try that, let’s just add one to the sizes from our earlier example:The result is:
This is a really nice property, and in fact, this is part of the standard that the DeepLab team uses for their experiments.
I’ve seen a lot of confusion about this scattered around online and in github issues, and I hope this clears up some of that confusion for anyone caught up in this. Our small example was just one-dimensional for simplicity’s sake, but of course this extends to two dimensions trivially; the top and bottom of the image would be treated the same as the left and right.
[For comparison, I quickly tried out MXNet’s and PyTorch’s bilinear resizing functions. MXNet’s
mxnet.ndarray.contrib.BilinearResize2D
is equivalent to Tensorflow’s align_corners
standard. And PyTorch, in it’s torch.nn.Upsample(mode='bilinear')
, also includes an align_corners
argument, which performs the same as Tensorflow when align_corners=True
. However, interestingly, when align_corners=False
, it performs equivalently to OpenCV’s resize
instead of mimicking Tensorflow.]