Thank you for your amazing work. I am implementing your method on my own dataset. I have questions regarding the PyTorch version of in-painting and out-painting. It looks like you replace the pixels within the window with random values in both transformations. For example, in in-painting, you use:
In this case the block is replaced with a single random value, which is the case according to your paper:
We then assign a random value to all pixels outside the window while retaining the original intensities for the pixels within. As for in-painting, we retain the original intensities outside the window and replace the intensity values of the inner pixels with a constant value.
This is also the case suggested by fig.1 in the paper. Which one is correct? Also I don't quite understand why the random noise is multiplied with 1.0 in both in-painting and out-painting. Since the np.random.rand function generates float numbers, the multiplication seems unnecessary.
Thank you for your amazing work. I am implementing your method on my own dataset. I have questions regarding the PyTorch version of in-painting and out-painting. It looks like you replace the pixels within the window with random values in both transformations. For example, in in-painting, you use:
which assigns random values to the block, instead of:
In this case the block is replaced with a single random value, which is the case according to your paper:
This is also the case suggested by fig.1 in the paper. Which one is correct? Also I don't quite understand why the random noise is multiplied with 1.0 in both in-painting and out-painting. Since the np.random.rand function generates float numbers, the multiplication seems unnecessary.