+%\footnote{\noindent This behaviour may be configured in some PDF viewers (Adobe Reader) whilst others (Evince, Atril, Okular) will choose whether or not to bother with antialiasing based on the zoom level. For best results experiment with changing the zoom level in your PDF viewer.\footnotemark}\footnotetext{On the author's hardware, the animals in the vector and raster images should appear mirrored pixel for pixel; but they may vary slightly on other PDF viewers or display devices.}
+
+In contrast, the left sides of Figures \ref{vector-vs-raster} and \ref{vector-vs-raster-scaled} are a vector image. A vector image contains information about a number of geometric shapes. To display this image on modern display hardware, the coordinates are transformed according to the view and \emph{then} the image is converted into a raster like representation. Whilst the raster image merely appears to contain edges, the vector image actually contains information about these edges, meaning they can be displayed ``infinitely sharply'' at any level of detail\cite{citationneeded} --- or they could be if the coordinates are stored with enough precision (see Section \ref{}). Thus, vector images are well suited to high quality digital art\footnote{Figure \ref{vector-vs-raster} is not to be taken as an example of this.} and text\cite{citationneeded}.
+
+
+\rephrase{Woah, an entire page with only one citation ham fisted in after I had written the rest... and the ``actually writing it'' phase of the Lit Review is off to a great start.}
+
+\newlength\imageheight
+\newlength\imagewidth
+\settoheight\imageheight{\includegraphics{figures/fox-raster.png}}
+\settowidth\imagewidth{\includegraphics{figures/fox-raster.png}}
+
+%Height: \the\imageheight
+%Width: \the\imagewidth
+
+
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[scale=0.7528125]{figures/fox-vector.pdf}
+ \includegraphics[scale=0.7528125]{figures/fox-raster.png}
+ \caption{Original Vector and Raster Images}\label{vector-vs-raster}
+\end{figure} % As much as I hate to break up the party, these fit best over the page (at the moment)
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[scale=0.7528125, viewport=210 85 280 150,clip, width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/fox-vector.pdf}
+ \includegraphics[scale=0.7528125, viewport=0 85 70 150,clip, width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/fox-raster.png}
+ \caption{Scaled Vector and Raster Images}\label{vector-vs-raster-scaled}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{Rendering Vector Images}
+
+Throughout Section \ref{vector-vs-raster-graphics} we were careful to refer to ``modern'' display devices, which are raster based. It is of some historical significance that vector display devices were popular during the 70s and 80s, and so algorithms for drawing a vector image directly without rasterisation exist. An example is the shading of polygons which is somewhat more complicated on a vector display than a raster display\cite{brassel1979analgorithm, lane1983analgorithm}.
+
+All modern displays of practical interest are raster based. In this section we explore the structure of vector graphics in more detail, and how different primitives are rendered.
+
+\rephrase{After the wall of citationless text in Section \ref{vector-vs-raster-graphics} we should probably redeem ourselves a bit here}
+
+\subsection{Bezier Curves}
+
+The bezier curve is of vital importance in vector graphics.
+
+\rephrase{Things this section lacks}
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item Who came up with them (presumably it was a guy named Bezier)
+ \item Flesh out how they evolved or came into use?
+ \item Naive algorithm
+ \item De Casteljau Algorithm
+\end{itemize}
+
+Recently, Goldman presented an argument that Bezier's could be considered as fractal in nature, a fractal being the fixed point of an iterated function system\cite{goldman_thefractal}. Goldman's proof depends upon a modification to the De Casteljau Subdivision algorithm. Whilst we will not go the details of the proof, or attempt comment on its theoretical value, it is interesting to note that Goldman's algorithm is not only worse than the De Casteljau algorithm upon which it was based, but it also performs worse than a naive Bezier rendering algorithm. Figure \ref{bezier-goldman} shows our results using implementations of the various algorithms in python.
+
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{figures/bezier-goldman.png}
+ \caption{Performance of Bezier Subdivision Algorithms}\label{bezier-goldman}
+\end{figure}
+
+\rephrase{Does the Goldman bit need to be here? Probably NOT. Do I need to check very very carefully that I haven't made a mistake before saying this? YES. Will I have made a mistake? Probably.}
+
+
+\subsection{Shapes}
+Shapes are just bezier curves joined together.
+
+\subsubsection{Approximating a Circle Using Cubic Beziers}
+
+An example of a shape is a circle. We used some algorithm on wikipedia that I'm sure is in Literature somewhere
+\cite{citationneeded} and made a circle. It's in my magical ipython notebook with the De Casteljau stuff.
+
+\subsection{Text}
+Text is just Bezier Curves, I think we proved out point with the circle, but maybe find some papers to cite\cite{citationneeded}
+
+
+\subsection{Shading}
+
+Shading is actually extremely complicated! \cite{brassel1979analgorithm, lane1983analgorithm}
+\rephrase{Sure, but do we care enough to talk about it? We will run out of space at this rate}
+
+\subsection{Other Things}
+We don't really care about other things in this report.
+
+\rephrase{6. Sort of starts here... or at least background does}
+
+\subsection{Rendering Vector Graphics on the GPU}
+
+Traditionally, vector graphics have been rasterized by the CPU before being sent to the GPU for drawing\cite{kilgard2012gpu}. Lots of people would like to change this \cite{worth2003xr, loop2007rendering, rice2008openvg, kilgard2012gpu, green2007improved} ... \rephrase{All of these are things David found except kilgard which I thought I found and then realised David already had it :S}
+
+\rephrase{2. Here are the ways documents are structured ... we got here eventually}
+
+\section{Document Representations}
+
+\rephrase{The file format can be either human readable\footnote{For some definition of human and some definition of readable} or binary\footnote{So, our viewer is basically a DOM style but stored in a binary format}. Can also be compressed or not. Here we are interested in how the document is interpreted or traversed in order to produce graphics output.}
+
+\subsection{Interpreted Model}
+
+\rephrase{Did I just invent that terminology or did I read it in a paper? Is there actually existing terminology for this that sounds similar enough to ``Document Object Model'' for me to compare them side by side?}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+ \item This model treats a document as the source code program which produces graphics
+ \item Arose from the desire to produce printed documents using computers (which were still limited to text only displays).
+ \item Typed by hand or (later) generated by a GUI program
+ \item PostScript --- largely supersceded by PDF on the desktop but still used by printers\footnote{Desktop pdf viewers can still cope with PS, but I wonder if a smartphone pdf viewer would implement it?}
+ \item \TeX --- Predates PostScript! {\LaTeX } is being used to create this very document and until now I didn't even have it here!