> Well, the basic idea was to see if, using a simple photograph or scan of an
> existing gear, if the number of teeth could be determined automatically and
> accurately.  Just like in the link.

I don't think their link is a very good way to do it, if there are 
artefacts on the photo you could end up with missing teeth or additional 
teeth in the count. It would only be accurate/reliable on super-clean 
photos.

I wonder if you could do some sort of polar->rectangular conversion of 
the image, once the centre is found (so x in the new image represents 
0-360 degrees polar angle, y represents radius at that angle). You can 
then do a fourier transform along x, and the frequency peak in the 
result will correspond to the number of teeth, and be far more immune to 
any artefacts/noise in the image.

This is exactly the technique I use to measure the pitch of regularly 
spaced identical objects in an image, it's extremely robust.

Post a reply to this message