Appeal 2007-0017
Application 10/074,179
Issue 3: Does Luo make up for the deficiencies of Ina?
Arguments
Appellant argues that the Examiner has failed to indicate exactly what
feature in Luo corresponds to the "computed face quality figure of merit" or
what is considered to be the "threshold" and where Luo discloses comparing
the "computed face quality figure of merit" to a "threshold," which makes it
difficult to determine why Luo has been cited (Br. 17). It is argued that Luo
discloses using red-eye detection for locating eyes in an image and that eye-
defect correction may automatically be performed once the eye locations are
determined, but does not disclose computing a face quality figure of merit
in-camera as part of a checking step to determine photo quality or comparing
a computed face quality figure of merit to a threshold to determine if it
exceeds the threshold (Br. 17).
The Examiner responds that computing a face quality figure of merit
corresponds to computing an eye-defect such as red-eye and comparing the
peak value to a threshold to determine if the face quality figure of merit
exceeds the threshold (Answer 12). In particular, the Examiner refers to
step 46 in Figure 8 as showing a threshold.
Appellant replies that Luo is not concerned with determining whether
the quality of an image is acceptable, but only determines the locations of
eyes using the red-eye phenomenon and compensates for the detected
red-eye (Reply Br. 9)
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013