Talk:Motion estimation
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | The contents of the Motion vector page were merged into Motion estimation. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Will someone with more knowledge of the subject than myself please merge the article on optical flow into this article. Dhatfield (talk) 07:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Merging with video tracking --- video tracking and motion estimation are related but ultimately distinct topics. They should not be merged. Video tracking focuses more on particular objects and following them through time in an image sequence. Motion estimation focuses on finding a 2-D transform that converts one image into another. The elements of such a transform may correspond to real-world objects or they may not. The most commonly used elements are multicolored 8x8 pixel squares, which until they are combined into a final image, generally bear little resemblance to objects. BrotherE (talk) 09:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: Merging with optical flow --- optical flow is a much more reasonable merge target. However, here too there are differences. In particular motion estimation, in my experience, usually refers to an application of optical flow techniques to video compression. Optical flow itself is much broader and refers to estimating the apparent motion of an image brightness pattern (Trucco and Veri p. 181). Optical flow is used, for example, in the vision of flies to aid in navigation. This, however, has little to do with video compression. I think these two should also remain separate articles. BrotherE (talk) 09:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Proposed merge of Motion vector into Motion estimation edit
circular definition fgnievinski (talk) 03:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)