{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018518518518518517, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.324675324675325, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of physically- and computer-generated imagery

Two processes to produce simulated imagery are contrasted. The first is a physical approach based on terrain board model scenes, illumination sources, and an electro-optical camera. The second method utilizes computer graphics to render a mathematical model of a scene. Examples of the same scene modeled physically and by computer graphics are compared with respect to their utility in portraying image quality characteristics.