How close to existing articles?
-
I've got code which rotates a GIF by shear, which would make a nice tip or trick. However someone else has also posted a article on rotating images by shear, which uses essentially the same underlying method, which is well-known and neither of us invented. There are two differences. He categorises his code as a Microsoft Foundation Class code and presents it in a way that is MFC-dependent. Whilst I wrap my algorithm in a GIF-rotate program. And he applies only one shear whilst I apply two, to maintain the dimesions of a square image. So is it to done thing to create or to hold off? I don't want to step on people's toes.
-
I've got code which rotates a GIF by shear, which would make a nice tip or trick. However someone else has also posted a article on rotating images by shear, which uses essentially the same underlying method, which is well-known and neither of us invented. There are two differences. He categorises his code as a Microsoft Foundation Class code and presents it in a way that is MFC-dependent. Whilst I wrap my algorithm in a GIF-rotate program. And he applies only one shear whilst I apply two, to maintain the dimesions of a square image. So is it to done thing to create or to hold off? I don't want to step on people's toes.
Thanks for your question. Nothing wrong with stepping on people's shoes when it comes to writing articles. If a topic gets covered to death and doesn't need to be written, that's the only crime and that doesn't sound like the case here.
Thanks, Sean Ewington CodeProject
-
I've got code which rotates a GIF by shear, which would make a nice tip or trick. However someone else has also posted a article on rotating images by shear, which uses essentially the same underlying method, which is well-known and neither of us invented. There are two differences. He categorises his code as a Microsoft Foundation Class code and presents it in a way that is MFC-dependent. Whilst I wrap my algorithm in a GIF-rotate program. And he applies only one shear whilst I apply two, to maintain the dimesions of a square image. So is it to done thing to create or to hold off? I don't want to step on people's toes.
It’s great that you’re considering the community and the existing work! Since your approach has distinct differences—like wrapping the algorithm in a GIF-rotate program and using two shears to maintain dimensions—there’s enough originality in your implementation to warrant sharing it. You could acknowledge the existing article in your work to show respect for the original author, while highlighting how your method differs. This way, you contribute to the conversation without stepping on toes. Sharing tips and tricks that build on existing knowledge is a valuable part of the community!