I had a quick question, and wondered if anyone had any ideas or libraries I could use for this. I am making a java game, and need to make 2d images concave. The problem is, 1: I don't know how to make an image concave. 2: I need the concave effect to be somewhat of a post process, think Oculus Rift. Everything is normal, but the camera of the player distorts the normal 2d images to look 3d. I am a Sophmore, so I don't know very complex math to accomplish this.
Thanks,
-Blue
If you're not using any 3D libraries or anything like that, just implement it as a simple 2D distortion. It doesn't have to be 100% mathematically correct as long as it looks OK. You can create a couple of arrays to store the distorted texture co-ordinates for your bitmap, which means you can pre-calculate the distortion once (which will be slow but only happens once) and then render multiple times using the pre-calculated values (which will be faster).
Here's a simple function using a power formula to generate a distortion field. There's nothing 3D about it, it just sucks in the center of the image to give a concave look:
int distortionU[][];
int distortionV[][];
public void computeDistortion(int width, int height)
{
// this will be really slow but you only have to call it once:
int halfWidth = width / 2;
int halfHeight = height / 2;
// work out the distance from the center in the corners:
double maxDistance = Math.sqrt((double)((halfWidth * halfWidth) + (halfHeight * halfHeight)));
// allocate arrays to store the distorted co-ordinates:
distortionU = new int[width][height];
distortionV = new int[width][height];
for(int y = 0; y < height; y++)
{
for(int x = 0; x < width; x++)
{
// work out the distortion at this pixel:
// find distance from the center:
int xDiff = x - halfWidth;
int yDiff = y - halfHeight;
double distance = Math.sqrt((double)((xDiff * xDiff) + (yDiff * yDiff)));
// distort the distance using a power function
double invDistance = 1.0 - (distance / maxDistance);
double distortedDistance = (1.0 - Math.pow(invDistance, 1.7)) * maxDistance;
distortedDistance *= 0.7; // zoom in a little bit to avoid gaps at the edges
// work out how much to multiply xDiff and yDiff by:
double distortionFactor = distortedDistance / distance;
xDiff = (int)((double)xDiff * distortionFactor);
yDiff = (int)((double)yDiff * distortionFactor);
// save the distorted co-ordinates
distortionU[x][y] = halfWidth + xDiff;
distortionV[x][y] = halfHeight + yDiff;
// clamp
if(distortionU[x][y] < 0)
distortionU[x][y] = 0;
if(distortionU[x][y] >= width)
distortionU[x][y] = width - 1;
if(distortionV[x][y] < 0)
distortionV[x][y] = 0;
if(distortionV[x][y] >= height)
distortionV[x][y] = height - 1;
}
}
}
Call it once passing the size of the bitmap that you want to distort. You can play around with the values or use a totally different formula to get the effect you want. Using an exponent less than one for the pow() function should give the image a convex look.
Then when you render your bitmap, or copy it to another bitmap, use the values in distortionU and distortionV to distort your bitmap, e.g.:
for(int y = 0; y < height; y++)
{
for(int x = 0; x < width; x++)
{
// int pixelColor = bitmap.getPixel(x, y); // gets undistorted value
int pixelColor = bitmap.getPixel(distortionU[x][y], distortionV[x][y]); // gets distorted value
canvas.drawPixel(x + offsetX, y + offsetY, pixelColor);
}
}
I don't know what your actual function for drawing a pixel to the canvas is called, the above is just pseudo-code.
Related
I've made a lighting engine which allows for shadows. It works on a grid system where each pixel has a light value stored as an integer in an array. Here is a demonstration of what it looks like:
The shadow and the actual pixel coloring works fine. The only problem is the unlit pixels further out in the circle, which for some reason makes a very interesting pattern(you may need to zoom into the image to see it). Here is the code which draws the light.
public void implementLighting(){
lightLevels = new int[Game.WIDTH*Game.HEIGHT];
//Resets the light level map to replace it with the new lighting
for(LightSource lightSource : lights) {
//Iterates through all light sources in the world
double circumference = (Math.PI * lightSource.getRadius() * 2),
segmentToDegrees = 360 / circumference, distanceToLighting = lightSource.getLightLevel() / lightSource.getRadius();
//Degrades in brightness further out
for (double i = 0; i < circumference; i++) {
//Draws a ray to every outer pixel of the light source's reach
double radians = Math.toRadians(i*segmentToDegrees),
sine = Math.sin(radians),
cosine = Math.cos(radians),
x = lightSource.getVector().getScrX() + cosine,
y = lightSource.getVector().getScrY() + sine,
nextLit = 0;
for (double j = 0; j < lightSource.getRadius(); j++) {
int lighting = (int)(distanceToLighting * (lightSource.getRadius() - j));
double pixelHeight = super.getPixelHeight((int) x, (int)y);
if((int)j==(int)nextLit) addLighting((int)x, (int)y, lighting);
//If light is projected to have hit the pixel
if(pixelHeight > 0) {
double slope = (lightSource.getEmittingHeight() - pixelHeight) / (0 - j);
nextLit = (-lightSource.getRadius()) / slope;
/*If something is blocking it
* Using heightmap and emitting height, project where next lit pixel will be
*/
}
else nextLit++;
//Advances the light by one pixel if nothing is blocking it
x += cosine;
y += sine;
}
}
}
lights = new ArrayList<>();
}
The algorithm i'm using should account for every pixel within the radius of the light source not blocked by an object, so i'm not sure why some of the outer pixels are missing.
Thanks.
EDIT: What I found is, the unlit pixels within the radius of the light source are actually just dimmer than the other ones. This is a consequence of the addLighting method not simply changing the lighting of a pixel, but adding it to the value that's already there. This means that the "unlit" are the ones only being added to once.
To test this hypothesis, I made a program that draws a circle in the same way it is done to generate lighting. Here is the code that draws the circle:
BufferedImage image = new BufferedImage(WIDTH, HEIGHT,
BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB);
Graphics g = image.getGraphics();
g.setColor(Color.white);
g.fillRect(0, 0, WIDTH, HEIGHT);
double radius = 100,
x = (WIDTH-radius)/2,
y = (HEIGHT-radius)/2,
circumference = Math.PI*2*radius,
segmentToRadians = (360*Math.PI)/(circumference*180);
for(double i = 0; i < circumference; i++){
double radians = segmentToRadians*i,
cosine = Math.cos(radians),
sine = Math.sin(radians),
xPos = x + cosine,
yPos = y + sine;
for (int j = 0; j < radius; j++) {
if(xPos >= 0 && xPos < WIDTH && yPos >= 0 && yPos < HEIGHT) {
int rgb = image.getRGB((int) Math.round(xPos), (int) Math.round(yPos));
if (rgb == Color.white.getRGB()) image.setRGB((int) Math.round(xPos), (int) Math.round(yPos), 0);
else image.setRGB((int) Math.round(xPos), (int) Math.round(yPos), Color.red.getRGB());
}
xPos += cosine;
yPos += sine;
}
}
Here is the result:
The white pixels are pixels not colored
The black pixels are pixels colored once
The red pixels are pixels colored 2 or more times
So its actually even worse than I originally proposed. It's a combination of unlit pixels, and pixels lit multiple times.
You should iterate over real image pixels, not polar grid points.
So correct pixel-walking code might look as
for(int x = 0; x < WIDTH; ++x) {
for(int y = 0; y < HEIGHT; ++y) {
double distance = Math.hypot(x - xCenter, y - yCenter);
if(distance <= radius) {
image.setRGB(x, y, YOUR_CODE_HERE);
}
}
}
Of course this snippet can be optimized choosing good filling polygon instead of rectangle.
This can be solved by anti-aliasing.
Because you push float-coordinate information and compress it , some lossy sampling occur.
double x,y ------(snap)---> lightLevels[int ?][int ?]
To totally solve that problem, you have to draw transparent pixel (i.e. those that less lit) around that line with a correct light intensity. It is quite hard to calculate though. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_anti-aliasing)
Workaround
An easier (but dirty) approach is to draw another transparent thicker line over the line you draw, and tune the intensity as needed.
Or just make your line thicker i.e. using bigger blurry point but less lit to compensate.
It should make the glitch less obvious.
(see algorithm at how do I create a line of arbitrary thickness using Bresenham?)
An even better approach is to change your drawing approach.
Drawing each line manually is very expensive.
You may draw a circle using 2D sprite.
However, it is not applicable if you really want the ray-cast like in this image : http://www.iforce2d.net/image/explosions-raycast1.png
Split graphic - gameplay
For best performance and appearance, you may prefer GPU to render instead, but use more rough algorithm to do ray-cast for the gameplay.
Nonetheless, it is a very complex topic. (e.g. http://www.opengl-tutorial.org/intermediate-tutorials/tutorial-16-shadow-mapping/ )
Reference
Here are more information:
http://what-when-how.com/opengl-programming-guide/antialiasing-blending-antialiasing-fog-and-polygon-offset-opengl-programming/ (opengl-antialias with image)
DirectX11 Non-Solid wireframe (a related question about directx11 with image)
I am trying to create a Java function to make a bulging effect on an image by shifting the pixel to the relative centre of the image. I first take the (x,y) coordinate of the pixel, find the relative shift, x = x-(x/2) and convert it to polar form [rcos(a), rsin(a)]. r is found by: r = Math.sqrt(xx + yy). Angle a is found using Math.atan2(y/x). New radius (r') is found using r' = 2r^1.5 . However, the new x,y values from [rcos(a), rsin(a)] exceed the dimensions of the image, and errors occur.
Am I making a fundamental mistake?
public void bulge()
{
double xval, yval = 0;
//loop through the columns
for(int x = 0; x < this.getWidth(); x++)
{
//loop through the rows
for(int y = 0; y < this.getHeight(); y++)
{
int redValue, greenValue, blueValue = 0;
double newRadius = 0;
Pixel pixel = this.getPixel(x,y);
redValue = pixel.getRed();
greenValue = pixel.getGreen();
blueValue = pixel.getBlue();
xval = x - (x/2);
yval = y - (y/2);
double radius = Math.sqrt(xval*xval + yval*yval);
double angle = Math.atan2(yval, xval);
newRadius = 2*(Math.pow(radius,1.5));
xval = (int)(newRadius*Math.sin(angle));
yval = (int)(newRadius*Math.cos(angle));
Pixel pixelNewPos = this.getPixel((int)xval, (int)yval);
pixelNewPos.setColor(new Color(redValue, greenValue, blueValue));
}
}
}
It's a lot easier to successfully apply a transform from source image A to destination image B by doing the reverse transform from pixels in image B to pixels in image A.
By this I mean for each pixel in destination image B, determine the pixel or pixels in source image A that contribute to the color. That way you don't end up with a whole bunch of pixels in the target image that haven't been touched.
As an example using a linear scaling operation by 2, a simple implementation might look like this:
for (int x = 0; x < sourceWidth; ++x) {
for (int y = 0; y < sourceHeight; ++y) {
Pixel sourcePixel = sourceImage.getPixel(x, y);
int destPixelX = x * 2;
int destPixelY = y * 2;
destImage.setPixel(destPixelX, destPixelY, sourcePixel);
}
}
It should be clear from this code that pixels with either odd numbers X or Y values will not be set in the destination image.
A better way would be something like this:
for (int x = 0; x < destWidth; ++x) {
for (int y = 0; y < destHeight; ++y) {
int sourcePixelX = x / 2;
int sourcePixelY = y / 2;
Pixel sourcePixel = sourceImage.getPixel(sourcePixelX, sourcePixelY);
destImage.setPixel(x, y, sourcePixel);
}
}
Although this is not a good image upscaling algorithm in general, it does show how to make sure that all the pixels in your target image are set.
Am I making a fundamental mistake?
At a conceptual level, yes. Your algorithm is taking a rectangular image and moving the location of the pixels to give a larger, non-rectagular image. Obviously that won't fit into your original rectangle.
So you either need to clip (i.e. discard) the pixels that fall outside of the rectangle, or you need to use a larger rectangle so that all of the mapped pixels fall inside it.
In the latter case, there will be gaps around the edges ...if your transformation is doing what you claim it does. A non-linear transformation of a rectangle is not going to have straight sides.
I am trying to detect a circular shape from an image which appears to have very good definition. I do realize that part of the circle is missing but from what I've read about the Hough transform it doesn't seem like that should cause the problem I'm experiencing.
Input:
Output:
Code:
// Read the image
Mat src = Highgui.imread("input.png");
// Convert it to gray
Mat src_gray = new Mat();
Imgproc.cvtColor(src, src_gray, Imgproc.COLOR_BGR2GRAY);
// Reduce the noise so we avoid false circle detection
//Imgproc.GaussianBlur( src_gray, src_gray, new Size(9, 9), 2, 2 );
Mat circles = new Mat();
/// Apply the Hough Transform to find the circles
Imgproc.HoughCircles(src_gray, circles, Imgproc.CV_HOUGH_GRADIENT, 1, 1, 160, 25, 0, 0);
// Draw the circles detected
for( int i = 0; i < circles.cols(); i++ ) {
double[] vCircle = circles.get(0, i);
Point center = new Point(vCircle[0], vCircle[1]);
int radius = (int) Math.round(vCircle[2]);
// circle center
Core.circle(src, center, 3, new Scalar(0, 255, 0), -1, 8, 0);
// circle outline
Core.circle(src, center, radius, new Scalar(0, 0, 255), 3, 8, 0);
}
// Save the visualized detection.
String filename = "output.png";
System.out.println(String.format("Writing %s", filename));
Highgui.imwrite(filename, src);
I have Gaussian blur commented out because (counter intuitively) it was greatly increasing the number of equally inaccurate circles found.
Is there anything wrong with my input image that would cause Hough to not work as well as I expect? Are my parameters way off?
EDIT: first answer brought up a good point about the min/max radius hint for Hough. I resisted adding those parameters as the example image in this post is just one of thousands of images all with varying radii from ~20 to almost infinity.
I've adjusted my RANSAC algorithm from this answer: Detect semi-circle in opencv
Idea:
choose randomly 3 points from your binary edge image
create a circle from those 3 points
test how "good" this circle is
if it is better than the previously best found circle in this image, remember
loop 1-4 until some number of iterations reached. then accept the best found circle.
remove that accepted circle from the image
repeat 1-6 until you have found all circles
problems:
at the moment you must know how many circles you want to find in the image
tested only for that one image.
c++ code
result:
code:
inline void getCircle(cv::Point2f& p1,cv::Point2f& p2,cv::Point2f& p3, cv::Point2f& center, float& radius)
{
float x1 = p1.x;
float x2 = p2.x;
float x3 = p3.x;
float y1 = p1.y;
float y2 = p2.y;
float y3 = p3.y;
// PLEASE CHECK FOR TYPOS IN THE FORMULA :)
center.x = (x1*x1+y1*y1)*(y2-y3) + (x2*x2+y2*y2)*(y3-y1) + (x3*x3+y3*y3)*(y1-y2);
center.x /= ( 2*(x1*(y2-y3) - y1*(x2-x3) + x2*y3 - x3*y2) );
center.y = (x1*x1 + y1*y1)*(x3-x2) + (x2*x2+y2*y2)*(x1-x3) + (x3*x3 + y3*y3)*(x2-x1);
center.y /= ( 2*(x1*(y2-y3) - y1*(x2-x3) + x2*y3 - x3*y2) );
radius = sqrt((center.x-x1)*(center.x-x1) + (center.y-y1)*(center.y-y1));
}
std::vector<cv::Point2f> getPointPositions(cv::Mat binaryImage)
{
std::vector<cv::Point2f> pointPositions;
for(unsigned int y=0; y<binaryImage.rows; ++y)
{
//unsigned char* rowPtr = binaryImage.ptr<unsigned char>(y);
for(unsigned int x=0; x<binaryImage.cols; ++x)
{
//if(rowPtr[x] > 0) pointPositions.push_back(cv::Point2i(x,y));
if(binaryImage.at<unsigned char>(y,x) > 0) pointPositions.push_back(cv::Point2f(x,y));
}
}
return pointPositions;
}
float verifyCircle(cv::Mat dt, cv::Point2f center, float radius, std::vector<cv::Point2f> & inlierSet)
{
unsigned int counter = 0;
unsigned int inlier = 0;
float minInlierDist = 2.0f;
float maxInlierDistMax = 100.0f;
float maxInlierDist = radius/25.0f;
if(maxInlierDist<minInlierDist) maxInlierDist = minInlierDist;
if(maxInlierDist>maxInlierDistMax) maxInlierDist = maxInlierDistMax;
// choose samples along the circle and count inlier percentage
for(float t =0; t<2*3.14159265359f; t+= 0.05f)
{
counter++;
float cX = radius*cos(t) + center.x;
float cY = radius*sin(t) + center.y;
if(cX < dt.cols)
if(cX >= 0)
if(cY < dt.rows)
if(cY >= 0)
if(dt.at<float>(cY,cX) < maxInlierDist)
{
inlier++;
inlierSet.push_back(cv::Point2f(cX,cY));
}
}
return (float)inlier/float(counter);
}
float evaluateCircle(cv::Mat dt, cv::Point2f center, float radius)
{
float completeDistance = 0.0f;
int counter = 0;
float maxDist = 1.0f; //TODO: this might depend on the size of the circle!
float minStep = 0.001f;
// choose samples along the circle and count inlier percentage
//HERE IS THE TRICK that no minimum/maximum circle is used, the number of generated points along the circle depends on the radius.
// if this is too slow for you (e.g. too many points created for each circle), increase the step parameter, but only by factor so that it still depends on the radius
// the parameter step depends on the circle size, otherwise small circles will create more inlier on the circle
float step = 2*3.14159265359f / (6.0f * radius);
if(step < minStep) step = minStep; // TODO: find a good value here.
//for(float t =0; t<2*3.14159265359f; t+= 0.05f) // this one which doesnt depend on the radius, is much worse!
for(float t =0; t<2*3.14159265359f; t+= step)
{
float cX = radius*cos(t) + center.x;
float cY = radius*sin(t) + center.y;
if(cX < dt.cols)
if(cX >= 0)
if(cY < dt.rows)
if(cY >= 0)
if(dt.at<float>(cY,cX) <= maxDist)
{
completeDistance += dt.at<float>(cY,cX);
counter++;
}
}
return counter;
}
int main()
{
//RANSAC
cv::Mat color = cv::imread("HoughCirclesAccuracy.png");
// convert to grayscale
cv::Mat gray;
cv::cvtColor(color, gray, CV_RGB2GRAY);
// get binary image
cv::Mat mask = gray > 0;
unsigned int numberOfCirclesToDetect = 2; // TODO: if unknown, you'll have to find some nice criteria to stop finding more (semi-) circles
for(unsigned int j=0; j<numberOfCirclesToDetect; ++j)
{
std::vector<cv::Point2f> edgePositions;
edgePositions = getPointPositions(mask);
std::cout << "number of edge positions: " << edgePositions.size() << std::endl;
// create distance transform to efficiently evaluate distance to nearest edge
cv::Mat dt;
cv::distanceTransform(255-mask, dt,CV_DIST_L1, 3);
unsigned int nIterations = 0;
cv::Point2f bestCircleCenter;
float bestCircleRadius;
//float bestCVal = FLT_MAX;
float bestCVal = -1;
//float minCircleRadius = 20.0f; // TODO: if you have some knowledge about your image you might be able to adjust the minimum circle radius parameter.
float minCircleRadius = 0.0f;
//TODO: implement some more intelligent ransac without fixed number of iterations
for(unsigned int i=0; i<2000; ++i)
{
//RANSAC: randomly choose 3 point and create a circle:
//TODO: choose randomly but more intelligent,
//so that it is more likely to choose three points of a circle.
//For example if there are many small circles, it is unlikely to randomly choose 3 points of the same circle.
unsigned int idx1 = rand()%edgePositions.size();
unsigned int idx2 = rand()%edgePositions.size();
unsigned int idx3 = rand()%edgePositions.size();
// we need 3 different samples:
if(idx1 == idx2) continue;
if(idx1 == idx3) continue;
if(idx3 == idx2) continue;
// create circle from 3 points:
cv::Point2f center; float radius;
getCircle(edgePositions[idx1],edgePositions[idx2],edgePositions[idx3],center,radius);
if(radius < minCircleRadius)continue;
//verify or falsify the circle by inlier counting:
//float cPerc = verifyCircle(dt,center,radius, inlierSet);
float cVal = evaluateCircle(dt,center,radius);
if(cVal > bestCVal)
{
bestCVal = cVal;
bestCircleRadius = radius;
bestCircleCenter = center;
}
++nIterations;
}
std::cout << "current best circle: " << bestCircleCenter << " with radius: " << bestCircleRadius << " and nInlier " << bestCVal << std::endl;
cv::circle(color,bestCircleCenter,bestCircleRadius,cv::Scalar(0,0,255));
//TODO: hold and save the detected circle.
//TODO: instead of overwriting the mask with a drawn circle it might be better to hold and ignore detected circles and dont count new circles which are too close to the old one.
// in this current version the chosen radius to overwrite the mask is fixed and might remove parts of other circles too!
// update mask: remove the detected circle!
cv::circle(mask,bestCircleCenter, bestCircleRadius, 0, 10); // here the radius is fixed which isnt so nice.
}
cv::namedWindow("edges"); cv::imshow("edges", mask);
cv::namedWindow("color"); cv::imshow("color", color);
cv::imwrite("detectedCircles.png", color);
cv::waitKey(-1);
return 0;
}
If you'd set minRadius and maxRadius paramaeters properly, it'd give you good results.
For your image, I tried following parameters.
method - CV_HOUGH_GRADIENT
minDist - 100
dp - 1
param1 - 80
param2 - 10
minRadius - 250
maxRadius - 300
I got the following output
Note: I tried this in C++.
Is this implementation of the following formula correct? I'm having a hard time implementing certain formula into java:
Formula (Original)
Y（x，y，t）=A*cos（w *（x，y）+ wt*t + FI;
Formula (Java)
float yPos = (float) (A* Math.cos((w * (y) + w * (x)) + wt* t+ FI));
yPos is the y (up) position of a vector on a grid. And since the original formula appears to return a vector i simply applied it to y.
I have created a 3 dimensional grid that contains vertices. Each vertices position is changed in an update loop using a nested for loop:
for (int y = 0; y < sizeY; y++) {
for (int x = 0; x < sizeX; x++) {
float xPos = x;
float yPos = 0;
float zPos = y;
yPos += sineY(x, y, time); // Cant be consistant Waves
waterVertexPos.set(xPos, yPos, zPos); //y is where z is
vertBufArray[index++] = waterVertexPos.getX();
vertBufArray[index++] = waterVertexPos.getY();
vertBufArray[index++] = waterVertexPos.getZ();
}
}
The for loop changes the yposition of each vertex using the above formula:
float yPos = (float) (A* Math.cos((w * (y) + w * (x)) + wt* t+ FI));
The information for the Formula:
Amplitude of these waves (A): half of the length between wave crest to trough;
Wavelength (L): distance between two wave crests;
Spatial angular frequency (w): direction of spatial anglular frequency is the same
with the wave diffuse direction, and the quantity is
relative with the wavelength L: |w|=2*PI/L;
Speed of waves (s): distance of the waves moved in one second;
Temporal angular frequency (wt): wt=S*2*PI/L;
Direction of waves (D): the direction of the wave crests.
Initiatory phase (FI): the initiatory phase of waves;
EDIT:
using this formula gives me the following result:
Source:
http://lnu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:205412/FULLTEXT01
w is a vector, so you need two numbers wx and wy:
float yPos = A*Math.cos(wx*x + wy*y + wt*t+ FI);
Otherwise, all should be fine, just be sure to expand all vector / matrix expressions into arithmetic operations when you encounter those.
I've been having trouble with an image interpolation method in Processing. This is the code I've come up with and I'm aware that it will throw an out of bounds exception since the outer loop goes further than the original image but how can I fix that?
PImage nearestneighbor (PImage o, float sf)
{
PImage out = createImage((int)(sf*o.width),(int)(sf*o.height),RGB);
o.loadPixels();
out.loadPixels();
for (int i = 0; i < sf*o.height; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < sf*o.width; j++)
{
int y = round((o.width*i)/sf);
int x = round(j / sf);
out.pixels[(int)((sf*o.width*i)+j)] = o.pixels[(y+x)];
}
}
out.updatePixels();
return out;
}
My idea was to divide both components that represent the point in the scaled image by the scale factor and round it in order to obtain the nearest neighbor.
For getting rid of the IndexOutOfBoundsException try caching the result of (int)(sf*o.width) and (int)(sf*o.height).
Additionally you might want to make sure that x and y don't leave the bounds, e.g. by using Math.min(...) and Math.max(...).
Finally, it should be int y = round((i / sf) * o.width; since you want to get the pixel in the original scale and then muliply with the original width. Example: Assume a 100x100 image and a scaling factor of 1.2. The scaled height would be 120 and thus the highest value for i would be 119. Now, round((119 * 100) / 1.2) yields round(9916.66) = 9917. On the other hand round(119 / 1.2) * 100 yields round(99.16) * 100 = 9900 - you have a 17 pixel difference here.
Btw, the variable name y might be misleading here, since its not the y coordinate but the index of the pixel at the coordinates (0,y), i.e. the first pixel at height y.
Thus your code might look like this:
int scaledWidth = (int)(sf*o.width);
int scaledHeight = (int)(sf*o.height);
PImage out = createImage(scaledWidth, scaledHeight, RGB);
o.loadPixels();
out.loadPixels();
for (int i = 0; i < scaledHeight; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < scaledWidth; j++) {
int y = Math.min( round(i / sf), o.height ) * o.width;
int x = Math.min( round(j / sf), o.width );
out.pixels[(int)((scaledWidth * i) + j)] = o.pixels[(y + x)];
}
}