Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!
Recent Comments
jrafrica on Hello world! Mr WordPress on Hello world!
Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!
 | jrafrica on Hello world! |
 | Mr WordPress on Hello world! |
Jrafrica's Blog 
Hi, this is a comment.
To delete a comment, just log in, and view the posts’ comments, there you will have the option to edit or delete them.
Activity 1- Digital Scanning
(figure to follow)
The figure above shows the result of overlap of the scanned graph with the actual pixel locations of the corresponding points of the graph. What i did was to crop the entire graph alone and put it in a program called Paint. Then positioning the origin i.e. where the x and y values starts at the uppermost left of the window. Then, as i marked the first point on the graph, there appeared the corresponding pixel location. As i got the number of horizontal and vertical number of pixels of the first point, i used the concept of ratio and proportion to converts a certain unit value to another unit value. Here, the actual pixel count is divided with the corresponding horizontal and vertical divisions on the graph. Now, i get the constant of proportionality along x and y which is expressed in number of pixels per unit of the axis. Then, knowing that proportionality constant as well as the values of the abscissa and ordinate values of the points on the graph, i just multiplied them so that i converted the value in units to pixel quantity. Then, upon plotting and overlapping the two graphs, i should expect the same or almost the positions of points. The slight mismatch of fit is due to the imperfections on the cropping process since in Paint, the user is only limited to perfectly cut square figures whose sides are exactly parallel with the window or screen otherwise the borders of the graph will not have the same thickness. This introduces the error since the assumption of using ratio and proportion is the consistency of points’ locations along x and y axes with the actual values of those points. So, the error propagated as the thickness of border becomes farther from the original thickness where the proportionality constant was derived.
The proportionality constant values are:
pixel value along x = (43/8)*(X-230)
pixel value along y = (54/0.25)*Y
where X= actual wavelength value
where Y=actual relative energy value
In terms of how well the reconstruction was, i would rate myself to 8.5 of 10.
By the way, the graph was from the journal of experimental zoology which was published around 1930’2.