4 ms·
> Well a matrix is a collection of vectors so That's like saying "a matrix is a collection of real numbers, so anything you say about one applies to the other"
by gspr 6y ago
> Well a matrix is a collection of vectors so
That's like saying "a matrix is a collection of real numbers, so anything you say about one applies to the other".
> You can certainly apply projections to images, I mean this is what photoshop does.
This doesn't seem to refer to anything in the comment you're replying to.
- sjg007 6y agoWould you please elaborate on your last point?
- gspr 6y agoIn reply to a comment that said nothing about projections, you wrote: > You can certainly apply projections to images, I mean this is what photoshop does. What's the relationship of this to anything in the comment you replied to?
- sjg007 6y ago"You would never matrix multiply an image onto another vector."
- gspr 6y ago> "You would never matrix multiply an image onto another vector." That wasn't me. But I can still elaborate: while you can certainly consider a non-color image as a matrix, the operation of multiplying this matrix with a vector is rather meaningless. While a lot of things can be made into or viewed as matrices, a matrix is typically only meaningful as a representation of a linear map.