Appeal No. 2000-1935
Application 08/460,937
in Kaufman because of the ability of this reference to view 3-D
voxel images along arbitrary viewing directions as depicted in
Figure 7.
Notwithstanding these deficiencies of Kaufman, the admitted
prior art discussed with respect to Figure 1 does indicate
according to the specification as filed that it was a known
feature of the central projection method that the images
themselves would be located between the view point and the
projection plane. On the other hand, the examiner's perspective
is wrongly-based according to the urging that Figure 6.21 at page
241 of Foley justifies this interpretation. Like appellants,
we do not agree with the examiner's interpretation that the
projection subject image in this figure is located between the
view point and the projection plane as claimed. However, Foley
does essentially teach this feature according to the statement at
the bottom of page 237 where he indicates that the "view plane
[projection plane] may be anywhere with respect to the world
objects to be projected: it may be in front of, cut through, or
be behind the objects."
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007