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
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment/response filed on 08/23/2024, which has been entered and made of record.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In page 9, line 2, “ML” should read “machine learning (ML)” since it ML as an aberration appears first time here in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
Claims 1, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achive_James (How to create generative animated NFT art in under an hour!, https://web.archive.org/web/20220412135912/https://jalagar-eth.medium.com/how-to-create-generative-animated-nft-art-in-under-an-hour-e7dab1785c56, hereinafter “Archive_James”) in view of Homburg et al. (Metadata schema and ontology for capturing and processing of 3D cultural heritage objects. Herit Sci 9, 91 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00561-w, hereinafter “Homburg”).
Regarding claim 1, Archive_James discloses A computer-implemented method, comprising: (page 2, para. 3, “I created a new generative gif engine command line tool which takes advantage of a well known Python library PIL to generate thousands of gifs 10x faster than other tools”).
identifying a plurality of artwork elements; (page 3, para 2, “For a simple example you could have two background layers”, and two backgrounds shown in page 3; page 3, para 3, “Plus two transparent ball layers:”, and one red ball and one blue ball shown in page 4). Note that: (1) as an example, there are four artwork elements (two backgrounds and two balls) as a plurality of artwork elements are identified or determined; and (2) the plurality of artwork elements can have more elements (e.g., additional landscape and hat later in some examples).
generating a plurality of artwork combinations using the plurality of artwork elements, (page 4, para. 1, “And the generative software would produce the following four images”, two artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements shown in page 4, and another two artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements shown in page 5). Note that: the plurality of artwork elements can have more elements (e.g., additional landscape and hat later in some examples) when generating a plurality of artwork combinations.
wherein each of the artwork combinations comprises two or more of the plurality of artwork elements, and (page 4, two artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements; page 5, another two artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements; page 1, each of the artwork combinations comprises four different artwork elements (background, ball, landscape, and hat)). Note that: (1) each of the artwork combinations comprises two or four artwork elements; and (2) the plurality of artwork elements can have more elements (e.g., additional landscape and hat later in some examples).
wherein each of the artwork combinations is unique compared with the other artwork combinations in the plurality of artwork combinations; (pages 4-5, each of the four combinations are different to each other by permutation of the elements; page 3, para. 1, “In the NFT space, it refers to using software to take individual layers and generate multiple possible combinations based on rarity”). Note that: in the field NFT, for the sake of rarity, the uniqueness of each NFT artwork is conventionally required and generated by the software.
determining a plurality of metadata relating to the plurality of artwork combinations; (page 14, para. 4, “Once you have generated the gifs and corresponding json metadata, you can now use this in your smart contract”). Note that: corresponding json metadata can be generated or determined for metadata for the generated gif (electronic artwork).
generating, using one or more computer processors, a first image using the plurality of artwork combinations, comprising: (page 1, “Bouncing ball collection using the generative art tool”, the caption of the figure of 6 gifs with 6 artwork combinations in two-row and three-column; page 6, paras. 2-4, “It took about an hour to only generate a hundred gifs but my computer was almost unusable … I honed in on optimizing the spritesheet to gifs step, and looked for open sourcetools, but only found websites that were more geared towards gamedevelopment (nothing that scaled to thousands of images). I thought aboutusing Python instead, and found Python Imaging Library (PIL) with almost 10kstars on Github. It worked perfectly”). Note that: (1) a computer has one or more processors; (2) the upper-left animated gif in page 1 of Archive_James can be regarded as a first image; and (3) the first image is generated using the plurality of artwork combinations (6 combinations).
selecting a first artwork combination from among the plurality of artwork combinations, the first artwork combination comprising a first plurality of artwork elements; (page 1, “Bouncing ball collection using the generative art tool”). Note that: the artwork combination corresponding to the upper-left gif in page 1 of Archive_James can be selected as a first artwork combination from among the 6 artwork combinations corresponding to 6 gifs in page 1.
retrieving a first plurality of images corresponding to the first plurality of artwork elements; (page 3, para 2, “For a simple example you could have two background layers”, and two backgrounds shown in page 3; page 3, para 3, “Plus two transparent ball layers:”, and one red ball and one blue ball shown in page 4; page 4, para. 1, “And the generative software would produce the following four images”, two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements shown in page 4, and another two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements shown in page 5). Note that: four artwork images with the backgrounds and balls as the artwork elements are in representation of a first plurality of images that can be retrieved from a storage as a set of stored elements.
identifying a layering order for the first plurality of artwork elements; and
creating the first image based on combining the first plurality of images using the layering order; and (page 11, paras. 2-3, “This step takes in an ordering of layers, in this example it would be background-> landscape -> ball -> hat. The resulting output looks something like (4 out of the 16 total)”, and 4 gifs with respective animation slides; page 1, “Bouncing ball collection using the generative art tool”, the caption of the figure of 6 gifs with 6 artwork combinations in two-row and three-column;). Note that: (1) an ordering of layers can be regarded as a layering order for the plurality of artwork elements (e.g., background -> landscape -> ball -> hat in this example). and (2) the first image (the upper-left gif of 6 gifs in page 1 of Archive_James) as a gif image is created based on combining the plurality of images (e.g., the layering images of background, landscape, ball, and hat in this example).
However, Archive_James fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics printing, Homburg discloses
printing a physical item using the first image and the determined plurality of metadata. (Homburg, page 2, col. left / para. 3 – col. right, para. 1, “Some properties can be taken directly from the final 3D model (e.g. the number of 3D points or the resolution of the 3D model), other parameters depend on the provision of metadata about the 3D model creation process. This includes metadata about the capturing device (e.g. technical properties, calibrations), geometric registration (e.g. global reference points, scales) as well as information about control elements (e.g. checkpoints, scales) [4, 5]. Information about the creation and post-processing of 3D models is also included in the metadata, e.g. settings of filters. This information contributes to the trustworthiness of the data and thus also of the resulting 3D model. Examples of applications for metadata include the resolution of a 3D scan for pattern recognition tasks, post-processing … or for 3D printing”). Note that: (1) a 3D model with properties (e.g. the number of 3D points or the resolution of the 3D model) can be regarded as a 3D image to substitute the first image; (2) the metadata of other parameters about the 3D model (e.g. technical properties, calibrations), geometric registration (e.g. global reference points, scales) as well as information about control elements (e.g. checkpoints, scales) depend on the provision of metadata about the 3D model creation process, can be regarded as metadata to substitute the determined plurality of metadata; and (3) the physical item of the 3D model as a 3D image can be printed out using 3D printing with the 3D model and the corresponding metadata.
Archive_James and Homburg are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply using 3D model and corresponding metadata for 3D printing, as taught by Homburg into Achive_James. The motivation would have been “Examples of applications for metadata include the resolution of a 3D scan for pattern recognition tasks, post-processing … or for 3D printing” (Homburg, page 2, col. right, para. 1). The suggestion for doing so would allow to print a physical copy using an image and corresponding metadata. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James and Homburg.
Regarding claim 5, Archive_James in view of Homburg discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the plurality of artwork combinations using the plurality of artwork elements comprises generating every possible combination of the plurality of artwork elements. (Archive_James, page 4, para. 1, “And the generative software would produce the following four images”, two artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements shown in page 4, and another two artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements shown in page 5). Note that: the mathematical permutation of two background elements and two ball elements generates 4 (= 2x2) combinations for every possible combination of the plurality of artwork elements.
Regarding claim 7, Archive_James in view of Homburg discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating, using the one or more computer processors, the first image using the plurality of artwork combinations further comprises: identifying a second plurality of layering orders, each of the layering orders corresponding to a respective element of the first plurality of artwork elements; and creating the first image based on combining the first plurality of images using each of the second plurality of layering orders. (Archive_James, page 11, paras. 2-3, “This step takes in an ordering of layers, in this example it would be background-> landscape -> ball -> hat. The resulting output looks something like (4 out of the 16 total)”, and 4 gifs with respective animation slides page 1, “Bouncing ball collection using the generative art tool”, the caption of the figure of 6 gifs with 6 artwork combinations in two-row and three-column). Note that: (1) a plurality of laying orders (“background-> ball -> landscape -> hat”) instead of a first plurality of layering orders (“background-> landscape -> ball -> hat”) can be identified and regarded as a second plurality of layering orders; (2) each of layering orders (e.g., landscape as the first order) corresponds to a respective element of the first plurality of artwork elements (e.g., element “landscape”); and (3) the upper-left gif image in page 1 of Archive_James can be generated or created by combining the first plurality of images (the images for background, landscape, ball, and hat) using each of the second plurality of layering orders (e.g., “background-> ball -> landscape -> hat”).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achive_James in view of Homburg, and further in Rutten (Grayscale to Color Digital Painting INSTANTLY with Photoshop, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N27kmaaYTh4, Jan 14, 2022, hereinafter “Rutten”).
Regarding claim 2, Archive_James in view of Homburg discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of images are
(Archive_James, page 4, para. 1, “And the generative software would produce the following four images”, two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements shown in page 4, and another two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements shown in page 5). Note that: the four artwork images with the backgrounds and balls as the artwork elements are in representation of the first plurality of images that can be retrieved from a storage as a set of stored elements.
However, Archive_James in view of Homburg fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, Rutten discloses … grayscale images… colorizing the plurality of images. (Rutten, page 1, line 9-10, “Learn how to automatically turn your grayscale digital paintings into color using the Colorize Neural Filter in Photoshop CC 2022”, and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to colorize grayscale images using Photoshop software tool). Note that: it is obvious to one having skills in the art that grayscale images can be the base images for the first plurality of images so that they can be colorized with the users’ preferences or requirements later.
Archive_James in view of Homburg, and Rutten, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply colorizing grayscale images, as taught by Rutten into Archive_James in view of Homburg. The motivation would have been “Learn how to automatically turn your grayscale digital paintings into color using the Colorize Neural Filter in Photoshop CC 2022” (Rutten, page 1, line 9-10). The suggestion for doing so would allow to colorize grayscale images. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, and Rutten.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Rutten, and further in view of Phlearn (Creative Coloring with Gradient Maps in Photoshop, Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb7kP-KbQVM, hereinafter “Phlearn”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Rutten discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein colorizing the plurality of images .
However, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Rutten fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, Phlearn discloses … uses a gradient map. (Phlearn, page 1, lines 10-13, “Today we show you how to add beautiful coloring to your photos with Gradient Maps in Photoshop! Learn how to use a Gradient Map to apply different colors to the highlights, midtones, and shadows of an image, and then use Blend If to protect skin tones and dial-in the perfect look”, and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to use a gradient map to colorize images using Photoshop software tool).
The combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Rutten, and Phlearn, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply colorizing images using a gradient map, as taught by Phlearn into the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Rutten. The motivation would have been “Learn how to use a Gradient Map” (Phlearn, page 1, line 11). The suggestion for doing so would allow to colorize images using a gradient map to improve the style. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Rutten, and Phlearn.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Rutten, and Phlearn, and further in view of VerticDesign (Photoshop How To Change Color of Object - With Masks Part 2 (Adobe Photoshop CS6/CC Tutorial, Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_3CIwlSQwc, Mar 18, 2017, hereinafter “VerticDesign”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Archive_James, Homburg, Rutten, and Phlearn discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein colorizing the plurality of images further .
However, the combination of Archive_James, Homburg, Rutten, and Phlearn fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, VerticDesign discloses
… uses a mask to modify one or more colors … (VerticDesign, page 1, lines, “To change the colour of an object with masks it's easy to do. I will tell you how to do it in this adobe Photoshop cc tutorial. Masks are similar to layers but they work differently and can give similar results”; and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to use masks to change object colors of using Photoshop software tool).
The combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Rutten, and Phlearn, and VerticDesign, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply using masks to change object colors of the images, as taught by VerticDesign into the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Rutten, and Phlearn. The motivation would have been “To change the colour of an object with masks it's easy to do.” (VerticDesign, page 1, line 11-12). The suggestion for doing so would allow to use a mask to modify one or more colors to improve the style. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Rutten, Phlearn, and VerticDesign.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achive_James in view of Homburg, and further in view of Crooks et al. (EP 3211891 A1, hereinafter “Crooks”).
Regarding claim 6, Archive_James in view of Homburg discloses The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein and wherein the plurality of metadata describes the artwork elements included in the first artwork combination.
However, Archive_James in view of Homburg fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, Crooks discloses the first image comprises a visible display of the plurality of metadata (Crooks, para. [0057], “Burn the metadata into the frame of interest as text such that the metadata is viewable within an image or video frame(s). Writing the metadata into a frame image header or image metadata”). Note that: the metadata as the plurality of metada are burned into the frame or image (the first image) as text so that the first image can be displayed with viewable metadata within the first image.
Archive_James in view of Homburg, and Crooks, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply burning metadata as text into an image, as taught by Crooks into Archive_James in view of Homburg. The motivation would have been “Burn the metadata into the frame of interest as text such that the metadata is viewable within an image or video frame(s)” (Crooks, para. [0057]). The suggestion for doing so would allow to have an image comprising the visible display of the metada. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, and Crooks.
Claims 8, 12, 14-15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achive_James in view of Homburg, and further in view of Peng (US 20200007914 A1, hereinafter “Peng”).
Claim 8 reciting “A non-transitory computer program product comprising: one or more non-transitory computer readable media containing, in any combination, computer program code that, when executed by operation of any combination of one or more processors, performs operations comprising:” corresponds to the method of claim 1. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same rationale for claim 1.
However, Achive_James in view of Homburg fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics, Peng discloses
A non-transitory computer program product comprising: one or more non-transitory computer readable media containing, in any combination, computer program code that, when executed by operation of any combination of one or more processors, performs operations comprising: (Peng, para. [0007], “a non-transitory computer readable storage medium is provided. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium is configured to store a computer program which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to carry out following actions”). Note that: a non-transitory computer readable storage medium with the corresponding software can be a non-transitory computer program product.
Achive_James in view of Homburg, and Peng, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply non-transitory computer readable media comprising
computer readable instructions which, when executed, configure a data processing system to perform operations, as taught by Peng into Achive_James in view of Homburg. The motivation would have been “a non-transitory computer readable storage medium is provided. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium is configured to store a computer program which, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to carry out following actions” (Peng, para. [0007]). The suggestion for doing so would allow to use one or more non-transitory computer readable media to perform computer graphics operations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng.
Claims 12 and 14 are corresponding to claims 5 and 7, respectively. Therefore, claims 12 and 14 are rejected for the same rationale for claims 5, and 7, respectively.
Claim 15 reciting “A system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories storing a program, which, when executed on any combination of the one or more processors, performs operations, the operations comprising:” corresponds to the method of claim 1. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for the same rationale for claim 1.
In addition, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng discloses A system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories storing a program, which, when executed on any combination of the one or more processors, performs operations, the operations comprising: (Peng, para. [0006], “The electronic device includes at least one processor and a computer readable storage. The computer readable storage is coupled to the at least one processor and stores at least one computer executable instruction thereon which, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to:”). Note that: the electronic device can be regarded as a system.
Achive_James in view of Homburg and Peng, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply the electronic device includes at least one processor and a computer readable storage, as taught by Peng into Achive_James in view of Homburg. The motivation would have been “The electronic device includes at least one processor and a computer readable storage. The computer readable storage is coupled to the at least one processor and stores at least one computer executable instruction thereon which, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to:” (Peng, para. [0006]). The suggestion for doing so would allow to use an electronic data processing device to perform computer graphics operations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng.
Claims 18 and 20 correspond to claims 5 and 7, respectively. Therefore, claims 12 and 14 are rejected for the same rationale for claims 5, and 7, respectively.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng, and further in Rutten.
Regard claim 9, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng discloses The non-transitory computer program product of claim 8, wherein the first plurality of images are
(Archive_James, page 4, para. 1, “And the generative software would produce the following four images”, two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements shown in page 4, and another two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements shown in page 5). Note that: the four artwork images with the backgrounds and balls as the artwork elements are in representation of the first plurality of images that can be retrieved from a storage as a set of stored elements.
However, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, Rutten discloses … grayscale images… colorizing the plurality of images. (Rutten, page 1, line 9-10, “Learn how to automatically turn your grayscale digital paintings into color using the Colorize Neural Filter in Photoshop CC 2022”, and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to colorize grayscale images using Photoshop software tool). Note that: it is obvious to one having skills in the art that grayscale images can be the base images for the first plurality of images so that they can be colorized with the users’ preferences or requirements later.
the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng, and Rutten, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply colorizing grayscale images, as taught by Rutten into the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng. The motivation would have been “Learn how to automatically turn your grayscale digital paintings into color using the Colorize Neural Filter in Photoshop CC 2022” (Rutten, page 1, line 9-10). The suggestion for doing so would allow to colorize grayscale images. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten.
Claims 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten, and further in view of Phlearn.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten discloses The non-transitory computer program product of claim 9, wherein colorizing the plurality of images .
However, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, Phlearn discloses … uses a gradient map. (Phlearn, page 1, lines 10-13, “Today we show you how to add beautiful coloring to your photos with Gradient Maps in Photoshop! Learn how to use a Gradient Map to apply different colors to the highlights, midtones, and shadows of an image, and then use Blend If to protect skin tones and dial-in the perfect look”, and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to use a gradient map to colorize images using Photoshop software tool).
The combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten, and Phlearn, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply colorizing images using a gradient map, as taught by Phlearn into the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten. The motivation would have been “Learn how to use a Gradient Map” (Phlearn, page 1, line 11). The suggestion for doing so would allow to colorize images using a gradient map to improve the style. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn discloses The system of claim 15, wherein the first plurality of images are , and wherein creating the first image based on combining the first plurality of images using the layering order comprises: (Archive_James, page 4, para. 1, “And the generative software would produce the following four images”, two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a red ball and a background as artwork elements shown in page 4, and another two artwork images of the corresponding artwork combinations with a blue ball and the other background as artwork elements shown in page 5). Note that: the four artwork images with the backgrounds and balls as the artwork elements are in representation of the first plurality of images that can be retrieved from a storage as a set of stored elements.
… grayscale images… colorizing the plurality of images. (Rutten, page 1, line 9-10, “Learn how to automatically turn your grayscale digital paintings into color using the Colorize Neural Filter in Photoshop CC 2022”, and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to colorize grayscale images using Photoshop software tool). Note that: it is obvious to one having skills in the art that grayscale images can be the base images for the first plurality of images so that they can be colorized with the users’ preferences or requirements later.
colorizing the plurality of images using a gradient map. (Phlearn, page 1, lines 10-13, “Today we show you how to add beautiful coloring to your photos with Gradient Maps in Photoshop! Learn how to use a Gradient Map to apply different colors to the highlights, midtones, and shadows of an image, and then use Blend If to protect skin tones and dial-in the perfect look”, and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to use a gradient map to colorize images using Photoshop software tool).
The motivation to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn given in claim 10 is incorporated here.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Rutten, Phlearn, and further in view of VerticDesign.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn discloses The non-transitory computer program product of claim 10, wherein colorizing the plurality of images further .
However, the combination of Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, VerticDesign discloses
… uses a mask to modify one or more colors … (VerticDesign, page 1, lines, “To change the colour of an object with masks it's easy to do. I will tell you how to do it in this adobe Photoshop cc tutorial. Masks are similar to layers but they work differently and can give similar results”; and the Youtube video by the corresponding link clearly shows how to use masks to change object colors of using Photoshop software tool).
The combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn, and VerticDesign, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply using masks to change object colors of the images, as taught by VerticDesign into the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, and Phlearn. The motivation would have been “To change the colour of an object with masks it's easy to do.” (VerticDesign, page 1, line 11-12). The suggestion for doing so would allow to colorize images using a gradient map to improve the style. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, Rutten, Phlearn, and VerticDesign.
Claim 17 is corresponding to claim 11. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for the same rationale for claims 11.
Claims 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng, and further in view of Crooks.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng discloses The non-transitory computer program product of claim 8, wherein and wherein the plurality of metadata describes the artwork elements included in the first artwork combination.
However, the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng fails to disclose, but in the same art of computer graphics and image processing, Crooks discloses the first image comprises a visible display of the plurality of metadata (Crooks, para. [0057], “Burn the metadata into the frame of interest as text such that the metadata is viewable within an image or video frame(s). Writing the metadata into a frame image header or image metadata”). Note that: the metadata as the plurality of metada are burned into the frame or image (the first image) as text so that the first image can be displayed with viewable metadata within the first image.
The combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng, and Crooks, are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics and image processing. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply burning metadata as text into an image, as taught by Crooks into the combination of Achive_James, Homburg, and Peng. The motivation would have been “Burn the metadata into the frame of interest as text such that the metadata is viewable within an image or video frame(s)” (Crooks, para. [0057]). The suggestion for doing so would allow to have an image comprising the visible display of the metadata. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Archive_James, Homburg, Peng, and Crooks.
Claim 19 is corresponding to claim 13. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same rationale for claims 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIAO CHEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1199. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm ET.
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, Kee M Tung can be reached at (571)272-7794. 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.
/Biao Chen/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611