You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It would be great if there was a flag to make the results identical to the output of compare_ssim from scikit image.
Their implementation uses no padding, but there's still a slight difference in my results, that I haven't found.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hello. I would also like it if there were a comparison with skimage.compare_ssim. Could you include a unit test which asserts that the outputs are at least np.allclose with the outputs from skimage?
The difference may be from the constants C1=(0.01)**2 and C2=(0.03)**2 which assume the range of pixel values is 0 to 1. If instead it is C1=(0.01*255)**2 and C2=(0.03*255)**2, along which removing padding, then the implementations match.
It would be great if there was a flag to make the results identical to the output of compare_ssim from scikit image.
Their implementation uses no padding, but there's still a slight difference in my results, that I haven't found.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: