DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 6, and 18 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant’s argument that, ‘Nakao does not transform a received first image into a modified version of that image’ [see applicant’s arguments of 6/11/2026, page 8] is not proper and substantiated by the disclosures found withing Nakao. E.g., the development processing disclosed in fig. 4 is applied on the captured first image to determine the developed image. The developed image tends to decrease the difference between a first image and a second image. Looked closely in fig. 4, the captured first image is processed in several steps starting from raw version of the first image to finally attain the final developed image. The developed image in every stage of development processing unit 113 can reasonably understood as transformed images at each transformation stage, wherein raw pixel data of the input image is processed to attain successive developed/transformed images.
Therefore, based on the arguments provided above, Examiner contends that Nakao sufficiently discloses the newly added feature of, “first image that is a transformed version of the first image, the modified first image”.
For further details see the rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAKAO (US 20210021757 A1) in view of Pettigrew et al. (US 20120201452 A1, hereinafter Pettigrew).
Regarding claim 1, Nakao discloses an apparatus (figs. 7-9, 14) comprising:
at least one memory (702/703, fig. 14); and
at least one processor (701, fig. 14) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the apparatus to (¶0120-0121):
receive a first image having first image data from a first camera (image received from camera 201-1, fig. 7, ¶0065);
receive a second image having second image data from a second camera (image received from camera 201-2, fig. 7, ¶0065);
determine an image-quality modification to be applied to the first image based at least partly in part on a comparison of one or more image-quality characteristics of the first image data with one or more image-quality characteristics of the second image data (The camera image quality adjustment system 200 is a system for adjusting image qualities of developed images output from the cameras 201-1, 201-2, and 201-3 to be close to each other. With this system, an image quality of a captured image captured by a camera can be adjusted to be close to a predetermined image quality. – ¶0065. Also see ¶0066
Then, for each camera, on the basis of the plurality of pieces of developed image data for image quality evaluation, the image quality evaluation system 202 evaluates each of color reproducibility, resolution, noise feeling, and the like to obtain image quality evaluation value groups e1, e2, and e3. – ¶0075), and
initiate application of the image-quality modification to the first image data to generate a modified first image that is a transformed version of the first image, the modified image having one or more image-quality characteristics that correspond to one or more image-quality characteristics of the second image (The image quality difference index Q is supplied to the image quality parameter automatic tuning system 204. Furthermore, the image quality parameter automatic tuning system 204 is also supplied with the image quality parameter groups P1, P2, and P3 of the corresponding cameras. The image quality parameter automatic tuning system 204 calculates next image quality parameter groups P1′, P2′, and P3′ on the basis of P1, P2, P3, and Q. The image quality parameter automatic tuning system 204 repeats this processing to derive image quality parameters P1, P2, and P3 that optimize the image quality difference index Q under a constraint condition L that ensures a certain image quality. Note that the image quality parameter automatic tuning system 204 may reference past P and Q. – ¶0078. Also see ¶006-0068
The transformation of first image is understood takes place during the development processing performed on the first image – Abstract, ¶0045, fig. 4. The process starts with a RAW version of the captured first image shown at the very left of fig. 4. Then a series of developments [understood as transformations] is performed on the raw first image, to find the developed/transformed image(s). Processing on Raw image is understood as performing modifications/transformation on the input image pixels, since the process start with a raw image, which is understood in the art as a collection of raw pixel data. Further proofs and indications of transformations are understood happening when Raw image is processed for offset removal, white balancing processing, noise reduction, Bayer processing, color space conversion, gamma processing, RGB/YCC conversion, applying unsharp masks and finally Jpeg conversion – in the subsequent transformation stages).
Regarding claim 2, Nakao discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first image data comprises a first camera parameter (¶0075, ¶0078, block 204, fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Nakao discloses the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to determine the modification by determining a second camera parameter for the second camera based at least in part on the first camera parameter (¶0075, ¶0078, block 204, fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, Nakao discloses the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the second camera parameter is configured to cause the second camera to produce a second image having a second image quality similar to a first image quality of a first image produced by the first camera (The camera image quality adjustment system 200 is a system for adjusting image qualities of developed images output from the cameras 201-1, 201-2, and 201-3 to be close to each other. With this system, an image quality of a captured image captured by a camera can be adjusted to be close to a predetermined image quality. – ¶0065. Also see ¶0067-0068, ¶0080).
Regarding claim 5, Nakao discloses the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the first camera parameter comprises an ambient light level, ambient color temperature, a resolution, an aperture, a gain level, an exposure time or shutter speed, an exposure compensation, a field of view, a zoom level, or a combination thereof (Image quality parameters (development parameters) are used for processing in processing blocks, and affect color reproducibility, resolution, noise feeling, and the like of developed image data, and change an image quality of the developed image data. – ¶0046. Also see ¶0070).
Regarding method claim(s) 6-9, 11 although wording is different, the material is considered substantively equivalent to the 1-5 claim(s) as described above.
Regarding claim 10, Nakao discloses the method of claim 9, wherein initiating the modification comprises transmitting the second camera parameter to the second camera (¶0078).
Regarding claim 12, Nakao discloses the method of claim 6, wherein determining the modification comprises using a trained model to determine the modification (The image quality parameter automatic tuning system 104 may use a neural network, deep learning, or the like. – ¶0053).
Regarding claim 13, Nakao discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the modification is configured to cause a first image quality of the first camera to be similar to a second image quality of the second camera (The camera image quality adjustment system 200 is a system for adjusting image qualities of developed images output from the cameras 201-1, 201-2, and 201-3 to be close to each other. With this system, an image quality of a captured image captured by a camera can be adjusted to be close to a predetermined image quality. – ¶0065. Also see ¶0067-0068, ¶0080).
Regarding claim 14, Nakao discloses the method of claim 6, wherein determining the modification comprises comparing a first image of the first camera to a second image of the second camera (The camera image quality adjustment system 200 is a system for adjusting image qualities of developed images output from the cameras 201-1, 201-2, and 201-3 to be close to each other. With this system, an image quality of a captured image captured by a camera can be adjusted to be close to a predetermined image quality. – ¶0065. Also see ¶0067-0068, ¶0080).
Regarding claim 15, Nakao discloses the method of claim 14, wherein implementing the modification comprises processing the first image, the second image, or a combination thereof to cause a first image quality of the first image to be similar to a second image quality of the second image (The camera image quality adjustment system 200 is a system for adjusting image qualities of developed images output from the cameras 201-1, 201-2, and 201-3 to be close to each other. With this system, an image quality of a captured image captured by a camera can be adjusted to be close to a predetermined image quality. – ¶0065. Also see ¶0067-0068, ¶0080).
Regarding claim 16, Nakao discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the modification is performed by the at least one processor (¶0120-0124, fig. 14, ¶0141, 0154).
Regarding claim 17, Nakao discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the modification is performed by a remote system (client server model to determine image quality and adjustment thereof from multiple camera streams is possible, fig. 11-13, ¶0094-0119).
Regarding claim 18, Nakao discloses a processor (CPU 701, ¶0120-0124, fig. 14), comprising:
at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to (¶0120-0124):
receive a first image having first image data from a first camera;
receive a second image having second image data from a second camera;
determine an image-quality modification to be applied to the first image based at least partly in part on a comparison of one or more image-quality characteristics of the first image data with one or more image-quality characteristics of
the second image data; and
initiate application of the image-quality modification to the first image data to generate a modified first image that is a transformed version of the first image, the modified first image having one or more image-quality characteristics that correspond to one or more image-quality characteristics of the second image (see substantively similar claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim(s) 19-20, although wording is different, the material is considered substantively equivalent to the claim(s) 1, and 5 as described above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHBAZ NAZRUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1467. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9.30 am-3 pm, 6.30 pm-9 pm, F: 9.30 am-1.30 pm, 4 pm-8 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lin Ye can be reached on 571-272-7372. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHAHBAZ NAZRUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights