ERRATA
SonkaHlavacBoyle
Image Processing, Analysis, and
Machine Vision
ISBN 049508252X
Chapter/Section/Page 
Existing
text 
Resolution 
p. 39 
256 such
cubes 
512 such cubes 
p. 41 
Sensors
based on photoemission principles explore the photoelectric effect 
Sensors
based on photoemission principles exploit the photoelectric effect 
p. 41 
This
phenomenon is explored in several technological elements 
This
phenomenon is exploited in several technological elements 
p. 43 
luminophore is exponential 
luminophore is described by a powerlaw
function 
p. 44 
The term “highpass filter” when
discussing losses within cables suggests that lowfrequency signals will be
rejected. 
It might be better to describe this
as an “equalization” process that accentuates higher frequency components. 
Eq. 3.5 
h(t)d\tau 
h(\tau)d\tau 
p. 53 
The complex Fourier transform of a
sinusoid consists of two spikes, not one as implied by the text. 

p. 53 
The condition that \intf(t)dt is finite does not
require an exponential decay in f(t), and would be met by a powerlaw decay
faster than 1/t 

p.56,
Eq. 3.23 
argtan 
arctan 
p.56, Eq.
3.23 
F^2 = (Re F^2) + (Im F^2) 
F^2 = (Re F)^2 + (Im F)^2 
p.65 
The number of possible DCT definitions
seems to be half as many as stated – excluding the oddextensions at both
ends reduces the 16 initial options down by a factor of ¼ (exluding oddodd, oddeven, evenodd, but leaving
eveneven). 

p.73 
unitary matrix 
unit matrix 
p.73 
It is unclear whether a Jordan
canonical form can be achieved by similarity transformation of a matrix
unless the given matrix is Hermitian (or
symmetric). 

p.74 
In the singularvalue decomposition
of a matrix, the matrix U is generally unitary, implying both row &
column orthogonality, whereas V is only column
orthogonal in general. 

p.81 
The speed of acoustic waves is
generally proportional to the squareroot of the elastic modulus, whereas the
text implies a direct proportionality to “the elastic properties of the medium” 

p.86 
The origin of chromatic aberration
is more strongly influenced by the propagation through the material of the
lens, rather than through air that surrounds it or the boundary between the
two. 

p.93,
Eq.3.90 
The scalar products are lacking
either “.”s or transposes, e.g. n.L or n^{T}L 

p.99 
It would be helpful to use the
example of satellite imaging of an airport to give examples of each of the
four levels of image representation. 

p.107 
the image size is 2^{L−1}.

the
image size is 2^L. 
p.109 
The reduction factor, \lambda
appears to be defined by only an upper bound – it is unclear whether Mi+1/Mi
is intended to be equal to \lambda or whether \lambda is some form of
bestfit to this ratio. 

p.111 
Multispectral images are more likely
to be represented as vectors of matrices (or thirdrank tensors) than by “binary
matrices” 

p. 124,
l. 5+6 
Output image pixel g(i,j) … f(i,j) in the input
image 
Output image
pixel f(i,j) … g(i,j) in the
input image 
p.134 
The paragraph breaks around “A
digital image is discrete in nature and so equations (5.32)...” seem to be in
the wrong place. 
??? 
p.139 
The expression of the Laplacian of a Gaussian is not correctly expressed within
polar coordinates. 
The correct expression for the Laplacian operator in 2D polar coordinates is \frac{1}{r}
\frac{\partial}{\partial r} r \frac{\partial}{\partial
r} + \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial\theta^2} 
p.139140 
This implies that equation 5.52
should contain a factor of (r^2/\sigma^22), and not (r^2/\sigma^21) as
stated in the text. This is perhaps more straightforwardly obtained by
calculating the Laplacian in Cartesian coordinates. 

p. 151 
The parameter D0 as
used in the Gaussian filter coincides with the dispersion sigma, not sigma^2. 

p. 151 
As the Butterworth
filter is normally used with a (power) frequency response that involves even powers of the frequency, it might be more usual
to replace n
with 2n. 

p. 159 
The diagonal elements of
the Harris matrix (equation 5.76) should involve \(\frac{\partial
f}{\partial x}\)^2 and \(\frac{\partial
f}{\partial y}\)^2 rather than second
derivatives, to be consistent with equation 5.75. The immediately preceeding text should also not
refer to the “second derivative”. 

p. 207 
The boldface on “main idea” is somewhat peculiar. 

p. 215 
The discussion of the
Hough transform jumps rather abruptly from identifying parametric curves to the detection of
symmetry axes. It would be worth a few comments about how the Hough transform can be formulated to detect,
e.g. a mirror symmetry. 

p. 238 
The definition of the
matching functions should probably include a scaling parameter alpha, e.g. C_3(u,v)
&= \frac{1}{\displaystyle 1+\sum_{(i,j)\in
V} \alpha^2 \big(f(i+u,j+v)  h(i,j)\big)^2} to emphasise
that the fact that the matching function is sensitive to the choice of
intensity scale in f and h, and the number of
pixels used in the summation. It might also be appropriate to renumber the
definitions C_n à C_(n−1) so that C_2 involves squares of the
pixeldifferences. 

p.263 
In the closing sentence
before algorithm 7.2 it might be worth adding “both” before “these pixels being represented in the joint
spatialimage domain”. 

p. 267 
The use of boldfaces in
the partial derivatives \partial \psi / \partial \mathbf{n}_R etc implies that these derivatives are vectors or tensors (this convention often being
used as a shorthand for \nabla \psi etc). 

p. 268 
The EulerLagrange
condition in equation 7.21 is incomplete when the functional being minimized includes
secondderivatives. A more complete condition also includes term − \frac{\d^2}{\d
s^2}E_{{\bf v}_s} (see LaTeX version
of errata) 

p. 270 
The first term in
equation 7.24 should have y^2_y replaced by u^2_y. It might also be worth expressing the first
term using delta notations (see LaTeX version of errata) 

p. 275 
The paragraph opening “Let
a curve moving in time t”
might better refer to a “closed curve”. 

p. 278 
Equation 7.40 is missing a “.” in the dotproduct between\nabla
\psi and \partial X / \partial
t 

p. 280 
Equation 7.44 implies
that c is a secondrank tensor.
It should probably refer to the divergence of r_−1r_ rather than its
gradient, to be consistent with the expanded form involving _xx etc. (see LaTeX version
of errata) 

p.282 
The earlier definition
of the interior of the contour has _ < 0 rather than _ > 0. To be consistent, all terms in equation 7.47 probably needs
to change sign. 

p. 282 
The derivation of μr. (r_−1r_) in equation 7.47 from “μ(Length of _)” in equation 7.46 is far from trivial, and
worthy of at least a brief explanation. I suspect that this term may actually be … (see LaTeX version of
errata) 

p. 309 
The use of boldface x etc in the first
introduction of the 3D matrix I(x, y, z) doesn”t seem consistent with immediately following use of x as a (unit) vector. 

p. 338 
The definition of the
continuous and discrete versions of h(_x,_y) are not consistent if the same b(x, y) is used. It is likely
that the continous version will involve the Dirac _function, i.e. b(x, y) being infinite rather
than unity on the contour so that the integral in equation 8.2 is nonzero. 

p. 339 
The superscript in equation 8.6 should probably be int (mathitalic) rather
than “int”. 

p. 340 
The coefficients a_0 and b_0 are probably not translationally or rotationally invariant, unlike the other coefficients. 

p. 340 
Equation 8.14 should
perhaps involve −uk rather than +uk so that the mean value
of a(lk) is zero. 

p. 345 
In the sentence “First,
they change their shape less then their control polygon”, “then” should be “than”. 

p. 357 
The definition of the “scaleinvariant”
quantity \eta_pq in equation 8.45 seems to imply that the scale alpha is known a priori. Given that the quantity μpq scales as _−(p+q+2) under x, y ! _x, _y, it would seem more
likely that _pq should be defined as: _pq = μpq (μ00)(p+q)/2+1 i.e. using μ rather than μ0. (see LaTeX version of errata) 

p. 360 
In algorithm 8.6, the
definition of v might
be more clearly expressed as Pq − Pk, rather than using an expression suggestive of the product of
two vectors. 

p. 368 
The regions being
described in Figure 8.34 a&b are unclear. It
would be helpful to shade those regions, or describe their shapes (e.g. “between
the triangular boundaries in (a)”). 

p. 370 
After the reference to Bookstein 1991, there is a double fullstop before the
sentence starting “If such a landmark model”. 

p. 460 
we seek
d b 
we seek \delta
b 
p. 462,
algorithm 10.4, item 4 
Ends
with “and halt” 

Chapter
10, Fig. 10.26, p. 491 
Alg.
10.9 referenced 
Alg.
10.10 shall be
referenced 
Chapter
10, eq. 10.28, p. 494 
extra
right “)” 
Remove
right “)” 
Chapter
15, p. 724, after eq. 15.9 
\sigma_x and \sigma_y are
defined as variances, not standard deviations 
redefine 
p. 771 
… this
other 
… this
and other 
Index 
Rtable
missing 
Add
Rtable 




































































