Posted by
audrey karperien on
May 13, 2006; 11:57pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/FracLac-options-Use-Relative-Sizes-tp3702772p3702773.html
Hi. Sorry to be so long in responding. I've been ill. The "relative sizes" option makes a series of sizes relative to the largest box where all sizes smaller than are factors of the largest box. For this option, box sizes per scan does not affect the series. To see the actual box sizes used, you can print the data file. Also, the sliding box bug is fixed in the latest FracLac. For textures, relative sizes/block analyses are generally most appropriate. "Power" and "Scaled" series are the same essentially; they are separate to make it easy for the user to specify the largest box to scale down from or an exponent to scale up with. The default series is linear, with smoothing and minimizing in the output in the analysis.
I hope that explains it. Let me know if you need a better explanation.
Audrey
Valerian Ignatescu <
[hidden email]> wrote:
Can anyone help me to understand how "Relative box sizes" works when one
selects this kind of generating the box size series?
My feeling is that using this option the fractal dimension is more
accurate at least in some types of solid structures (even a rotated
square). On the other side the number of boxes as given in the result
window ranges only from 6 to 20 depending on the value of the largest grid
(not a monotonic dependence though). In addition, the option "box sizes
per scan" does not seem to do anything in this case. Even worse, "Sliding
Box Lacunarity Scan" does not work at all if I "Use Relative Sizes".
My guess is that "Use default box sizes" generates a linear series from
the smalles to the biggest grid by adding the smallest increment, but I
have no idea how "Use Relative Sizes" works considering that power series
and scaled series (exponential?) are separated options.
Thank you.
Vali