hmmph, I used both fftn and fft2, they both produce the same result. Is
there a restriction on the dimension of the input? power of 2 or some such?
On 12/29/2011 07:21 AM, Torgil Svensson wrote:
This is because fft computes one-dimensional transforms (on each row).
Try fft2 instead.
//Torgil
Sorry, i should have looked at your image. A few test you can do is
1) does ifft2 give you back the original image? (allclose returned
True for a little test I did here)
2) does scipy.fftpack.fft2 yield the same result?
//Torgil
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Burlen Loring
This is because fft computes one-dimensional transforms (on each row).
Try fft2 instead.
//Torgil
fft(a, n=None, axis=-1)
Compute the one-dimensional discrete Fourier Transform.
fft2(a, s=None, axes=(-2, -1))
Compute the 2-dimensional discrete Fourier Transform
fftn(a, s=None,
I had intended to stay quiet in this discussion since I am not a core
developer and also no longer even lead the doc project. However, I've
watched two organizations go very wrong very fast recently. Both were
similar in structure to this one. I've done some study as a result and
there are some
Hi All,
I thought I'd raise this topic just to get some ideas out there. At the
moment I see two areas that I'd like to see addressed.
1. Documentation editor. This would involve looking at the generated
documentation and it's organization/coverage as well such things as style
and
there seems to be some undocumented restriction on dimensions as when I
work with 512x512 data things work as expected.
On 12/29/2011 09:43 AM, Torgil Svensson wrote:
Sorry, i should have looked at your image. A few test you can do is
1) does ifft2 give you back the original image? (allclose
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi All,
I thought I'd raise this topic just to get some ideas out there. At the
moment I see two areas that I'd like to see addressed.
1. Documentation editor. This would involve looking at the generated
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Ralf Gommers
ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I thought I'd raise this topic just to get some ideas out there. At the
moment I see two areas that I'd like to see
Hi Numpy users!
I maintain the boundary value problem solver package
scikits.bvp_solverhttp://pypi.python.org/pypi/scikits.bvp_solver.
It's had problems with f2py for a while, and I am not sure where they are
coming from. I made this stackoverflow
Hi!
Along with test coverage, have any of you considered any systematic
monitoring of NumPy performance?
I'm mildly obsessed with performance and benchmarking of NumPy. I used
to use a lot of MATLAB until a year back and I tend to compare Python
performance with it all the time. I generally
On 12/29/11 10:37 PM, Jaidev Deshpande wrote:
Hi!
Along with test coverage, have any of you considered any systematic
monitoring of NumPy performance?
I'm mildly obsessed with performance and benchmarking of NumPy. I used
to use a lot of MATLAB until a year back and I tend to compare Python
11 matches
Mail list logo
