| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,826 |
| | Posted: | | | | SharpnessCheck 1.0.0I asked ChatGPT if there was any software component that could help determine how sharp an image was. It pointed me to Accord.NET, or more specifically Accord.Imaging. My interest was piqued,so I decided to write a tool that used this component. And SharpnessCheck is the result. My goal was to find the least sharp cover scans, so I could scan them - hopefully better - myself. So, did SharpnessCheck fulfill my dreams? Eh, not quite. Accord.Imaging's routines for determining sharpness was - I presume - meant for photographs. Cover scans don't have quite the same properties as regular photographs, so that might explain why the results are not quite what you would expect. Still, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't share this tool, so you can play with it yourselves. On my initial tests it was quite slow. Scanning some 9000 images took about 14 minutes. Then I decided to go parallel. That was a new experience for me. This lets me use all the CPU cores for processing the image checks. Did that make a difference? You bet! It reduced the time from 14 minutes to 1 1/2. Now, the result will of course depend on your CPU. Mine is an Intel i5 with 6 cores, allowing 12 parallel tasks to run. See the help file for details!  PS: Just so you know, this will hog your CPU quite a bit. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar | | | | Last edited: by GSyren |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,826 |
| | Posted: | | | | SharpnessCheck 1.0.1A bug fix and a small enhancement (in case anyone is interested): 1) After Re-load result, the Save result menu item could be disabled so you couldn't save any changes. Fixed. 2) If you press spacebar to flag a row, the next row is now automatically selected. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: September 1, 2016 |  Posts: 170 |
| | Posted: | | | | the help file doesn't show anything for me. is the variance number what i am looking at and the lower the number the worse the cover? |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,826 |
| | Posted: | | | | You may need to unblock the help file in order for it to display correctly. In Explorer, right click on the help file and select Properties. Near the bottom you should see where you unblock it. Click there and the help file should work as intended. And yes, lower value is meant to indicate blurrier cover. Your mileage may vary …  | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: September 1, 2016 | | Posts: 170 |
| | Posted: | | | | thank you. help file works now and now to see how many low number covers pop up  |
|
| Registered: June 2, 2009 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thank you, Gunnar. Will seek my teeth into this new tool in the next days. Just when I thought I was out, you pull me back in!  |
|
| Registered: January 27, 2009 |  Posts: 183 |
| | Posted: | | | | Get this error, and have 96gig of memory.  |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,826 |
| | Posted: | | | | That’s odd. I have run the program quite a few times and I haven’t seen this error.
Still, unless it’s a hardware issue (which I doubt), it would seem that I have a memory leak. I normally compile for "Any CPU", which I believe limits the usable memory to 2 GB. That should be more than enough.
I’ll take a look and see if I can spot any possible memory leak. I can also re-compile for 64 bit only. I don’t think very many people run on 32 bit anymore. That will remove any memory restraints. But that’s rather hiding the problem instead of solving it.
Out of curiosity, does this error occur every time you run the program? | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,826 |
| | Posted: | | | | SharpnessCheck 1.1.0It looks like I was wrong. I don't think it is a memory leak. It probably is a hardware issue, sort of. Too powerful hardware. I ran some tests, and with my 6 core cpu (running 12 tasks), the program topped about 1,3 GB memory. That means that if you have a cpu with more than 6 cores, you could possibly hit that 2 GB limit. I have made two changes. First of all I have compiled for 64 bit. Secondly, I have added a setting where you can limit the number of tasks used. By default the program uses all it can get, but you can limit it if needed. @species_8472, I hope that this solves the problem. PS. If anyone actually wants the 32 bit version, let me know. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: January 27, 2009 | | Posts: 183 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
That’s odd. I have run the program quite a few times and I haven’t seen this error.
Still, unless it’s a hardware issue (which I doubt), it would seem that I have a memory leak. I normally compile for "Any CPU", which I believe limits the usable memory to 2 GB. That should be more than enough.
I’ll take a look and see if I can spot any possible memory leak. I can also re-compile for 64 bit only. I don’t think very many people run on 32 bit anymore. That will remove any memory restraints. But that’s rather hiding the problem instead of solving it.
Out of curiosity, does this error occur every time you run the program? Yes, everytime and sometimes get a GDI error, which seem to not be able to recreate at well. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,826 |
| |