9
$\begingroup$

Possible duplicate: Computer Vision questions are on-topic or off-topic?

The Computer Vision proposal is about halfway there. According to the meta post I linked above, the scope of that proposal is covered by DSP. However, I don't see any mention of computer vision topics in the FAQ.

So, is computer vision on-topic here? If so, can we edit the FAQ to include these topics?

$\endgroup$

closed as too localized by Aarthi Jun 29 '12 at 14:36

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ Computer Vision has been closed as a duplicate of DSP. :) $\endgroup$ – Aarthi Jun 29 '12 at 14:36
8
$\begingroup$

I guess it could be added, but I'm not sure it needs to be. All signal/image processing aspects of CV are by default on-topic and welcome here. The machine learning and statistics aspect of it might be better served on Stats.SE, although I wouldn't close such a question right away. By the way, is our third largest tag.

Re: merging of the proposal, if the CV folks want to merge here, they're more than welcome on DSP.SE. On the other hand, if they weren't for merging, then I'd suggest giving CV a chance to be a site on its own. Having seen Area 51 proposals folded into others because of topical similarity, but otherwise having entirely different goals, audiences and more importantly, a possible pre-existing community, I'll say that people aren't generally happy about it (and sometimes, are even bitter). The chances of them being active here after folding when they were "this close to beta" are slim to none (because this is "not their site").

On the other hand, if they were given an opportunity to prove themselves, but failed to, for some reason, we'll gladly take them in our fold and house them under a tag (just like Go -> BCG, ML -> Stats). They're more likely to stick on at that point, because there already is some time and effort invested and they've seen for themselves first hand that they couldn't make it. If they do make it out there, well, then good for them. We all benefit from it either way.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Computer vision questions was the reason I joined this site. Often they don't seem appropriately places on SO, and yet the Computer Vision proposal has not made it to beta. Indeed, there is a discussion on the proposal site discussing whether to merge CV with DSP.

So I'd say, yes - they are on topic, and no - the FAQ already says "for practitioners of ... image and video processing" so in my opinion, that covers computer vision.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

I would say a definite YES - computer vision is an example of a field where where DSP/DIP are applied to the highest order. How can it not be on topic? Definitely a YES.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

I think it depends on the direction of the question.

Discussing techniques, methods, approaches maybe diverges a little from what signal processing is about.

But if the questions are about mathematical transformations of the visual signal, 3D conversion, etc, definetly we are talking about signal processing, so it is on-topic.

It is just a matter of how people ask questions.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .