A Dialect for Imaging and Graphics

  • Oleh J. Tretiak
  • Sanjay Bhasin
Part of the Languages and Information Systems book series (LISS)


Our group at Drexel University’s Image Processing Center is engaged in research and development in Image Data Analysis, Computer Vision, and Image Processing. A typical researcher is expert in some field of Imaging Science, but is not a computer scientist. Nevertheless, a typical project requires substantial computer programming on the part of the researcher. Typically, these programs include computer graphics, program control through a menuing system, as well as imaging calculations specific to the task. Computer graphics involves the generation, representation, manipulation, and evaluation of graphic objects with related nongraphic information, and interactive operations such as drawing or picking. Menuing operations require adherence to a complex protocol of declarations and invocations that are specific to the computer system. Image computations require manipulation of complex data structures in the framework of a Vision Kernel that has a certain class of objects and standard operations. These data structures may or may not be compatible with the Graphics Kernel. Thus a program that creates user interfaces and acts upon objects in the image must cover all these areas.


Geometric Object Magic Number Geometric Transformation Region Object Graphic Object 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S.S. Abi-Ezzi and A.J. Bunshaft, An implemented view of PHIGS, IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl.6(2), 12–23, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Shuey, D. Bailey, and T.P. Morrissey, PHIGS: A standard, dynamic, interactive graphics interface, IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl.6(8), 50–57, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P.S. Barth, An object-oriented approach to graphical interfaces, ACM Trans. Graph.5(2), 142–172, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    B.J. Mac Lennan, Principles of Programming Languages: Design, Evaluation, and Implementation, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.J.B. Duff and S. Levialdi, Languages and Architectures for Image Processing, Academic Press, London, 1981.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Evans Jr. and K.J. Butler, (Eds.), Diana—An intermediate Language for Ada, Revised Version, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1983.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P.H. Feller, Relationship between IDL and structure editor generation technology, SIGPLAN Not.22(11), 1987.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Goldberg and D. Robinson, Smalltalk-80: The Language and its Implementation, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1983.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Green, The University of Alberta User Interface Management System, SIGGRAPH’85 Proceedings, 205–213, 1985.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Enderle, K. Kansky, and G. Pfaff, Computer Graphics Programming GKSThe Graphics Standard, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D.A. Lamb, Sharing intermediate representations: The interface description language ph. D. dissertation, Computer Science Department, Carnegie-Mellon University, May 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M.A. Linton, J.M. Vlissides, and P.R. Calder, Composing user interfaces with interviews, IEEE Comput.22(2), 8–22, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    P.S. Modenov and A.S. Parkhomenko, Geometric Transformations, Vols. 1 and 2, Academic Press, New York, 1965.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.R. Nestor, W.A. Wulf, and D.A. Lamb, IDL—Interface description language—Formal description, Technical Report, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, February, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    W.M. Newman and R.F. Sproull, An Approach to Graphics Systems Design, Tutorial: Computer Graphics, IEEE Computer Society, New York, 2nd ed., April 1982.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R.W. Scheifler and J. Gettys, The X window system, ACM Trans. Graph.5(2), 79–109, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Serra, Image Analysis and Mathematical Morphology, Academic Press, London, 1982.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    K. Shannon, T. Maroney, and R. Snodgrass, Using IDL with C, SoftLab Document No. 6, Computer Science Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, May 1985.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. Snodgrass, Ed., IDL manual entries (Version 2.0), SoftLab Document No. 15. Computer Science Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, December 1985.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    B. Stroustrup, TheC++ Programming Language, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1986.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    W.B. Warrren, J. Kickenson, and R. Snodgrass, A tutorial introduction to using IDL, SIGPLAN Not.22(11), 1987.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Williams, An architecture for user interface R&D, IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl.6(7), 39–50, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. Rosenfield and A.C. Kak, Digital Picture Processing, Vol. 1, Academic Press, New York, 2nd ed., 1982.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Rosenfield and A.C. Kak, Digital Picture Processing, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, 2nd ed., 1982.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M.K. Hu, Visual pattern recognition by moment invariants, I.R.E. Trans. Inf. Theory, 1962.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oleh J. Tretiak
    • 1
  • Sanjay Bhasin
    • 1
  1. 1.Image Processing CenterDrexel UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations