Thank you to the people who previously helped me, I have managed to work a lot on my generative business cards assignment.
I want to randomly resize 9 images in processing but can't seem to find a good example on the internet on how to do it. The size of the images is 850x550 which is also the background size.
Does anyone know a good and easy to follow tutorial? or could give me an example?
The Processing's documentation on the image() method covers this.
I still wrote you some skeleton code to demonstrate:
PImage img;
int w, h;
float scaleModifier = 1;
void setup() {
size(800, 600);
img = loadImage("bean.jpeg");
w = img.width;
h = img.height;
}
void draw() {
background(0);
image(img, 0, 0, w, h); // here is the important line
}
// Every click will resize the image
void mouseClicked() {
scaleModifier += 0.1;
if (scaleModifier > 1) {
scaleModifier = 0.1;
}
w = (int)(img.width * scaleModifier);
h = (int)(img.height * scaleModifier);
}
What's important to know is the following:
image() has 2 signatures:
image(img, a, b)
image(img, a, b, c, d)
Where the following applies:
img => the PImage for your image
a => x coordinate where to draw the image
b => y coordinate where to draw the image
c => the image's width (if it's different from the image's width, this implies a resize)
d => the image's height (also implies a resize if it's different from the "real" height)
Have fun!
say you have stored an image in a PImage object, image
you can generate two random integers for the img_width and img_height of the image and then resize() the image using resize() method
int img_width = foor(random(min_value, max_value));
int img_height = floor(random(min_value, max_value));
image.resize(img_width, img_height); //this simple code resizes the image to any dimension
or if you want to keep the same aspect ratio, then you can use this approach
//first set either of width or height to a random value
int img_width = floor(random(min_value, max_value));
//then proportionally calculate the other dimension of the image
float ratio = (float) image.width/image.height;
int img_height = floor(img_width/ratio);
image.resize(img_width, img_height);
You can check this out YouTube playlist for some tutorials of image processing.
Related
I'm using OpenCV.js to rotate image to the left and right, but it was cropped when I rotate.
This is my code:
let src = cv.imread('img');
let dst = new cv.Mat();
let dsize = new cv.Size(src.rows, src.cols);
let center = new cv.Point(src.cols/2, src.rows/2);
let M = cv.getRotationMatrix2D(center, 90, 1);
cv.warpAffine(src, dst, M, dsize, cv.INTER_LINEAR, cv.BORDER_CONSTANT, new cv.Scalar());
cv.imshow('canvasOutput', dst);
src.delete(); dst.delete(); M.delete();
Here is an example:
This is my source image:
This is what I want:
But it returned like this:
What should I do to fix this problem?
P/s: I don't know how to use different languages except javascript.
A bit late but given the scarcity of opencv.js material I'll post the answer:
The function cv.warpAffine crops the image because it only does a mathematical transformation as documented on OpenCV and other sources, if you wish to do rotations to any angle you'll need to calculate the padding in order to compensate that.
If you wish to only rotate in multiples of 90 degrees you could use cv.rotate as follows:
cv.rotate(src, dst, cv.ROTATE_90_CLOCKWISE);
Where src is the matrix with your source image, dst is the destination matrix which could be defined empty as follows let dst = new cv.Mat(); and cv.ROTATE_90_CLOCKWISE is the rotate flag indicating the angle of rotation, there are three different options:
cv.ROTATE_90_CLOCKWISE
cv.ROTATE_180
cv.ROTATE_90_COUNTERCLOCKWISE
You can find which OpenCV functions are implemented on OpenCV.js on the repository's opencv_js.congif.py file if the function is indicated as whitelisted then is working on opencv.js even if it is not included in the opencv.js tutorial.
The info about how to use each function can be found in the general documentation, the order of the parameters is generally the indicated on the C++ indications (don't be distracted by the oscure C++ vector types sintax) and the name of the flags (like rotate flag) is usually indicated on the python indications.
I was also experiencing this issue so had a look into #fernando-garcia's answer, however I couldn't see that rotate had been implemented in opencv.js so it seems that the fix in the post #dan-mašek's links is the best solution for this, however the functions required are slightly different.
This is the solution I came up with (note, I haven't tested this exact code and there is probably a more elegant/efficient way of writing this, but it gives the general idea. Also this will only work with images rotated by multiples of 90°):
const canvas = document.getElementById('canvas');
const image = cv.imread(canvas);
let output = new cv.Mat();
const size = new cv.Size();
size.width = image.cols;
size.height = image.rows;
// To add transparent borders
const scalar = new cv.Scalar(0, 0, 0, 0);
let center;
let padding;
let height = size.height;
let width = size.width;
if (height > width) {
center = new cv.Point(height / 2, height / 2);
padding = (height - width) / 2;
// Pad out the left and right before rotating to make the width the same as the height
cv.copyMakeBorder(image, output, 0, 0, padding, padding, cv.BORDER_CONSTANT, scalar);
size.width = height;
} else {
center = new cv.Point(width / 2, width / 2);
padding = (width - height) / 2;
// Pad out the top and bottom before rotating to make the height the same as the width
cv.copyMakeBorder(image, output, padding, padding, 0, 0, cv.BORDER_CONSTANT, scalar);
size.height = width;
}
// Do the rotation
const rotationMatrix = cv.getRotationMatrix2D(center, 90, 1);
cv.warpAffine(
output,
output,
rotationMatrix,
size,
cv.INTER_LINEAR,
cv.BORDER_CONSTANT,
new cv.Scalar()
);
let rectangle;
if (height > width) {
rectangle = new cv.Rect(0, padding, height, width);
} else {
/* These arguments might not be in the right order as my solution only needed height
* > width so I've just assumed this is the order they'll need to be for width >=
* height.
*/
rectangle = new cv.Rect(padding, 0, height, width);
}
// Crop the image back to its original dimensions
output = output.roi(rectangle);
cv.imshow(canvas, output);
I am doing a background subtraction capture demo recently but I met with difficulties. I have already get the pixel of silhouette extraction and I intend to draw it into a buffer through createGraphics(). I set the new background is 100% transparent so that I could only get the foreground extraction. Then I use saveFrame() function in order to get png file of each frame. However, it doesn't work as I expected. I intend to get a series of png of the silhouette extraction
with 100% transparent background but now I only get the general png of frames from the camera feed. Is there anyone could help me to see what's the problem with this code? Thanks a lot in advance. Any help will be appreciated.
import processing.video.*;
Capture video;
PGraphics pg;
PImage backgroundImage;
float threshold = 30;
void setup() {
size(320, 240);
video = new Capture(this, width, height);
video.start();
backgroundImage = createImage(video.width, video.height, RGB);
pg = createGraphics(320, 240);
}
void captureEvent(Capture video) {
video.read();
}
void draw() {
pg.beginDraw();
loadPixels();
video.loadPixels();
backgroundImage.loadPixels();
image(video, 0, 0);
for (int x = 0; x < video.width; x++) {
for (int y = 0; y < video.height; y++) {
int loc = x + y * video.width;
color fgColor = video.pixels[loc];
color bgColor = backgroundImage.pixels[loc];
float r1 = red(fgColor); float g1 = green(fgColor); float b1 = blue(fgColor);
float r2 = red(bgColor); float g2 = green(bgColor); float b2 = blue(bgColor);
float diff = dist(r1, g1, b1, r2, g2, b2);
if (diff > threshold) {
pixels[loc] = fgColor;
} else {
pixels[loc] = color(0, 0);
}
}}
pg.updatePixels();
pg.endDraw();
saveFrame("line-######.png");
}
void mousePressed() {
backgroundImage.copy(video, 0, 0, video.width, video.height, 0, 0, video.width, video.height);
backgroundImage.updatePixels();
}
Re:
Then I use saveFrame() function in order to get png file of each frame. However, it doesn't work as I expected. I intend to get a series of png of the silhouette extraction with 100% transparent background but now I only get the general png of frames from the camera feed.
This won't work, because saveFrame() saves the canvas, and the canvas doesn't support transparency. For example, from the reference:
It is not possible to use the transparency alpha parameter with background colors on the main drawing surface. It can only be used along with a PGraphics object and createGraphics(). https://processing.org/reference/background_.html
If you want to dump a frame with transparency you need to use .save() to dump it directly from a PImage / PGraphics.
https://processing.org/reference/PImage_save_.html
If you need to clear your PImage / PGraphics and reuse it each frame, either use pg.clear() or pg.background(0,0,0,0) (set all pixels to transparent black).
I am confused about what does Point2f returns. I have vector<Point2f> corner; So, what would be the coordinate of rows and columns? Will it be following:
int row_coordinate = corner[i].x;
int col_coordinate = corner[i].y;
But I get a segmentation fault if I take the above-mentioned convention. And if I do it like
int row_coordinate = corner[i].y;
int col_coordinate = corner[i].x;
then I get the results but then it seems to be opposite to the OpenCV documentation. Kindly tell me which one is correct. Would be very nice if you provide some documentation link (which I have already tried to search a lot).
If I'm correct, I assume you're confused with the coordinate system of OpenCV.
Since I always use x as width and y as height, in my program, I use OpenCV like this:
// make an image with height 100 and width 200
cv::Mat img = cv::Mat::zeros(100, 200, CV_8UC1);
int width = img.cols;
int height = img.rows;
cv::Point2f pt(10, 20);
// How do I get a pixel at x = 10 and y = 20 ?
int px = img.at<uchar>(pt.y, pt.x); // yep, it's inverted
What does it mean? OpenCV corrdinate system is based on rows and then columns. If you want to get pixels at (x, y) access it using (y, x)
I'm trying to make a copy of the resizing algorithm of OpenCV with bilinear interpolation in C. What I want to achieve is that the resulting image is exactly the same (pixel value) to that produced by OpenCV. I am particularly interested in shrinking and not in the magnification, and I'm interested to use it on single channel Grayscale images. On the net I read that the bilinear interpolation algorithm is different between shrinkings and enlargements, but I did not find formulas for shrinking-implementations, so it is likely that the code I wrote is totally wrong. What I wrote comes from my knowledge of interpolation acquired in a university course in Computer Graphics and OpenGL. The result of the algorithm that I wrote are images visually identical to those produced by OpenCV but whose pixel values are not perfectly identical (in particular near edges). Can you show me the shrinking algorithm with bilinear interpolation and a possible implementation?
Note: The code attached is as a one-dimensional filter which must be applied first horizontally and then vertically (i.e. with transposed matrix).
Mat rescale(Mat src, float ratio){
float width = src.cols * ratio; //resized width
int i_width = cvRound(width);
float step = (float)src.cols / (float)i_width; //size of new pixels mapped over old image
float center = step / 2; //V1 - center position of new pixel
//float center = step / src.cols; //V2 - other possible center position of new pixel
//float center = 0.099f; //V3 - Lena 512x512 lower difference possible to OpenCV
Mat dst(src.rows, i_width, CV_8UC1);
//cycle through all rows
for(int j = 0; j < src.rows; j++){
//in each row compute new pixels
for(int i = 0; i < i_width; i++){
float pos = (i*step) + center; //position of (the center of) new pixel in old map coordinates
int pred = floor(pos); //predecessor pixel in the original image
int succ = ceil(pos); //successor pixel in the original image
float d_pred = pos - pred; //pred and succ distances from the center of new pixel
float d_succ = succ - pos;
int val_pred = src.at<uchar>(j, pred); //pred and succ values
int val_succ = src.at<uchar>(j, succ);
float val = (val_pred * d_succ) + (val_succ * d_pred); //inverting d_succ and d_pred, supposing "d_succ = 1 - d_pred"...
int i_val = cvRound(val);
if(i_val == 0) //if pos is a perfect int "x.0000", pred and succ are the same pixel
i_val = val_pred;
dst.at<uchar>(j, i) = i_val;
}
}
return dst;
}
Bilinear interpolation is not separable in the sense that you can resize vertically and the resize again vertically. See example here.
You can see OpenCV's resize code here.
I'm using Emgu.CV to perform some basic image manipulation and composition. My images are loaded as Image<Bgra,Byte>.
Question #1: When I use the Image<,>.Add() method, the images are always blended together, regardless of the alpha value. Instead I'd like them to be composited one atop the other, and use the included alpha channel to determine how the images should be blended. So if I call image1.Add(image2) any fully opaque pixels in image2 would completely cover the pixels from image1, while semi-transparent pixels would be blended based on the alpha value.
Here's what I'm trying to do in visual form. There's a city image with some "transparent holes" cut out, and a frog behind. This is what it should look like:
And this is what openCV produces.
How can I get this effect with OpenCV? And will it be as fast as calling Add()?
Question #2: is there a way to perform this composition in-place instead of creating a new image with each call to Add()? (e.g. image1.AddImageInPlace(image2) modifies the bytes of image1?)
NOTE: Looking for answers within Emgu.CV, which I'm using because of how well it handles perspective warping.
Before OpenCV 2.4 there was no support of PNGs with alpha channel.
To verify if your current version supports it, print the number of channels after loading an image that you are certain to be RGBA. If it supports, the application will output the number 4, else it will output number 3 (RGB). Using the C API you would do:
IplImage* t_img = cvLoadImage(argv[1], CV_LOAD_IMAGE_UNCHANGED);
if (!t_img)
{
printf("!!! Unable to load transparent image.\n");
return -1;
}
printf("Channels: %d\n", t_img->nChannels);
If you can't update OpenCV:
There are some posts around that try to bypass this limitation but I haven't tested them myself;
The easiest solution would be to use another API to load the image and blend it, check blImageBlending;
Another alternative, not as lightweight, is to use Qt.
If your version already supports PNGs with RGBA:
Take a look at Emulating photoshop’s blending modes in OpenCV. It implements several Photoshop blending modes and I imagine you are capable of converting that code to .Net.
EDIT:
I had to deal with this problem recently and I've demonstrated how to deal with it on this answer.
You'll have to iterate through each pixel. I'm assuming image 1 is the frog image, and image 2 is the city image, with image1 always being bigger than image2.
//to simulate image1.AddInPlace(image2)
int image2w = image2.Width;
int image2h = image2.Height;
int i,j;
var alpha;
for (i = 0; i < w; i++)
{
for (j = 0; j < h; j++)
{
//alpha=255 is opaque > image2 should be used
alpha = image2[3][j,i].Intensity;
image1[j, i]
= new Bgra(
image2[j, i].Blue * alpha + (image1[j, i].Blue * (255-alpha)),
image2[j, i].Green * alpha + (image1[j, i].Green * (255-alpha)),
image2[j, i].Red * alpha + (image1[j, i].Red * (255-alpha)));
}
}
Using Osiris's suggestion as a starting point, and having checked out alpha compositing on Wikipedia, i ended up with the following which worked really nicely for my purposes.
This was used this with Emgucv. I was hoping that the opencv gpu::AlphaComposite methods were available in Emgucv which I believe would have done the following for me, but alas the version I am using didn't appear to have them implemented.
static public Image<Bgra, Byte> Overlay( Image<Bgra, Byte> image1, Image<Bgra, Byte> image2 )
{
Image<Bgra, Byte> result = image1.Copy();
Image<Bgra, Byte> src = image2;
Image<Bgra, Byte> dst = image1;
int rows = result.Rows;
int cols = result.Cols;
for (int y = 0; y < rows; ++y)
{
for (int x = 0; x < cols; ++x)
{
// http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_compositing
double srcA = 1.0/255 * src.Data[y, x, 3];
double dstA = 1.0/255 * dst.Data[y, x, 3];
double outA = (srcA + (dstA - dstA * srcA));
result.Data[y, x, 0] = (Byte)(((src.Data[y, x, 0] * srcA) + (dst.Data[y, x, 0] * (1 - srcA))) / outA); // Blue
result.Data[y, x, 1] = (Byte)(((src.Data[y, x, 1] * srcA) + (dst.Data[y, x, 1] * (1 - srcA))) / outA); // Green
result.Data[y, x, 2] = (Byte)(((src.Data[y, x, 2] * srcA) + (dst.Data[y, x, 2] * (1 - srcA))) / outA); // Red
result.Data[y, x, 3] = (Byte)(outA*255);
}
}
return result;
}
A newer version, using emgucv methods. rather than a loop. Not sure it improves on performance.
double unit = 1.0 / 255.0;
Image[] dstS = dst.Split();
Image[] srcS = src.Split();
Image[] rs = result.Split();
Image<Gray, double> srcA = srcS[3] * unit;
Image<Gray, double> dstA = dstS[3] * unit;
Image<Gray, double> outA = srcA.Add(dstA.Sub(dstA.Mul(srcA)));// (srcA + (dstA - dstA * srcA));
// Red.
rs[0] = srcS[0].Mul(srcA).Add(dstS[0].Mul(1 - srcA)).Mul(outA.Pow(-1.0)); // Mul.Pow is divide.
rs[1] = srcS[1].Mul(srcA).Add(dstS[1].Mul(1 - srcA)).Mul(outA.Pow(-1.0));
rs[2] = srcS[2].Mul(srcA).Add(dstS[2].Mul(1 - srcA)).Mul(outA.Pow(-1.0));
rs[3] = outA.Mul(255);
// Merge image back together.
CvInvoke.cvMerge(rs[0], rs[1], rs[2], rs[3], result);
return result.Convert<Bgra, Byte>();
I found an interesting blog post on internet, which I think is related to what you are trying to do.
Please have a look at the Creating Overlays Method (archive.org link). You can use this idea to implement your own function to add two images in the way you mentioned above, making some particular areas in the image transparent while leaving the rest as it is.