I have an image and a version that is scaled down to exactly half the width and height. The Lanczos filter (with a = 3) has been used to scale the image. Color spaces can be ignored, all colors are in a linear space.
Since the small image contains one pixel for each 2x2 pixel block of the original I'm thinking it should be possible to restore the original image from the small one with just 3 additional color values per 2x2 pixel block. However, I do not know how to calculate those 3 color values.
The original image has four times as much information as the scaled version. Using the original image I want to calculate the 3/4 of information that is missing in the scaled version such that I can use the scaled version and the calculated missing information to reconstruct the original image.
Consider the following use-case: Over a network you send the scaled image to a user as a thumbnail. Now the user wants to see the image at full size. How can we avoid repeating information that is already in the thumbnail? As far as I can tell progressive image compression algorithms do not manage to do this with more complex filtering.
For the box filter the problem is trivial. But since the kernels of the Lanczos filter overlap each other I do not know how to solve it. Given that this is just a linear system of equations I believe it is solvable. Additionally I would rather avoid deconvolution in frequency space.
How can I calculate the information that is missing in the down-scaled version and use it to restore the original image?
Related
I have a monochrome image whose size is greater than 10 gigabytes (50000x50000). This image has a lot of "holes", pixels with NULL value.
Conventionally, I know how to use python griddata function to read in the whole image and fill the pixels with NULL value with different interpolation method. But the problem now is that I can't process the whole image at once due to the size of this image, which will give me an memory exhausted error.
So, now my idea is that I could divide this image into 2500 (50x50) windows and I run the interpolation method on each window. But the obvious problem is that for each window, the NULL pixel is interpolated with neighboring pixels only in the same window, which is against the nature of an image, because the pixel on the edge of a window can not be interpolated by the pixel in neighboring windows. In order to solve this problem, overlapping the windows may be a solution. I can only think of this solution. Does anyone know if there is an efficient and intact method to interpolate a very large image.
You'd need to give a lot more information I think, but if the holes are small, one simple solution is just to replace null pixels with values from a median filter.
For example, using pyvips:
#!/usr/bin/python3
import sys
import pyvips
image = pyvips.Image.new_from_file(sys.argv[1], access="sequential")
image = (image == 0).ifthenelse(image.median(5), image)
image.write_to_file(sys.argv[2])
That will open the image in sequential mode (we only need to make one pass over the image, so we don't need random access to pixels). A 5x5 median filter can fill holes up to perhaps three pixels across. You can use a larger window to fill larger holes, but of course it'll get slower.
It should be pretty quick, and it'll work on images of any size using only a little memory.
You'd need to consider something more complex if you need to fill large areas.
i'm work on graduation project for image forgery detection using CNN , Most of the paper i read before feed the data set to the network they Down scale the image size, i want to know how Does this process effect image information ?
Images are resized/rescaled to a specific size for a few reasons:
(1) It allows the user to set the input size to their network. When designing a CNN you need to know the shape (dimensions) of your data at each step; so, having a static input size is an easy way to make sure your network gets data of the shape it was designed to take.
(2) Using a full resolution image as the input to the network is very inefficient (super slow to compute).
(3) For most cases the features desired to be extracted/learned from an image are also present when downsampling the image. So in a way resizing an image to a smaller size will denoise the image, filtering out much of the unimportant features within the image for you.
Well you change the images size. Of course it changes it's information.
You cannot reduce image size without omitting information. Simple case: Throw away every second pixel to scale image to 50%.
Scaling up adds new pixels. In its simplest form you duplicate pixels, creating redundant information.
More complex solutions create new pixels (less or more) by averaging neighbouring pixels or interpolating between them.
Scaling up is reversible. It doesn't create nor destroy information.
Scaling down divides the amount of information by the square of the downscaling factor*. Upscaling after downscaling results in a blurred image.
(*This is true in a first approximation. If the image doesn't have high frequencies, they are not lost, hence no loss of information.)
I have two binary images of hand which are almost same.How should I compare them to know whether they represent almost same shape or not.I have tried finding euclidean distance between two images but its not giving correct answer if the image is slightly changed or moved to left or right or slight decrease in size.I have also tried HOG descriptors in opencv still I am unable to get correct answer if I compare more than one image.What is the best way to compare two binary images based on shape or any feature to know nearly matching images not considering the size of the image.Links to images are http://postimg.org/image/w20tuuzmv/ and http://postimg.org/image/jndr4br9x/
I think that Generalized Hough transform might be a good solution for you. Here is a tutorial about it.
Alternatively uou can try to cut hand from one image (just use contour bounding rect) and than use it as a template and search for it in second image using template matching technique - here you can read more about. When you will find point with highest correlation value, you need to decide whether it is big enough - you need to find threshold on your own.
Are the images just rotated, translated and scaled? If so you could compute the principal components of the images using PCA, then rotate the images so that the first component is in a certain direction (e.g. always vertical) you could then compute the centroids of the images and translate them to be always in the same position (e.g. center of the image), to use always the same scale you could resize the images so that the sum of the distances between each white pixel with the centroid is the same in both images. Now it's easy to compare the images for example score = np.sum(A==B)
My current project is to calculate the surface area of the paste covered on the cylinder.
Refer the images below. The images below are cropped from the original images taken via a phone camera.
I am thinking terms like segmentation but due to the light reflection and shadows a simple segmentation won’t work out.
Can anyone tell me how to find the surface area covered by paste on the cylinder?
First I'd simplify the problem by rectifying the perspective effect (you may need to upscale the image to not lose precision here).
Then I'd scan vertical lines across the image.
Further, you can simplify the problem by segmentation of two classes of pixels, base and painted. Make some statistical analysis to find the range for the larger region, consisting of base pixels. Probably will make use of mathematical median of all pixels.
Then you expand the color space around this representative pixel, until you find the highest color distance gap. Repeat the procedure to retrieve the painted pixels. There's other image processing routines you may have to do such as smoothing out the noise, removing outliers and background, etc.
What is the efficient way to compare two images in visual c..?
Also in which format images has to be stored.(bmp, gif , jpeg.....)?
Please provide some suggestions
If the images you are trying to compare have distinctive characteristics that you are trying to differentiate then PCA is an excellent way to go. The question of what format of the file you need is irrelevant really; you need to load it into the program as an array of numbers and do analysis.
Your question opens a can of worms in terms of complexity.
If you want to compare two images to check if they are the same, then you need to perform an md5 on the file (removing possible metainfos which could distort your result).
If you want to compare if they look the same, then it's a completely different story altogether. "Look the same" is intended in a very loose meaning (e.g. they are exactly the same image but stored with two different file formats). For this, you need advanced algorithms, which will give you a probability for two images to be the same. Not being an expert in the field, I would perform the following "invented out of my head" algorithm:
take an arbitrary set of pixel points from the image.
for each pixel "grow" a polygon out of the surrounding pixels which are near in color (according to HSV colorspace)
do the same for the other image
for each polygon of one image, check the geometrical similitude with all the other polygons in the other image, and pick the highest value. Divide this value by the area of the polygon (to normalize).
create a vector out of the highest values obtained
the higher is the norm of this vector, the higher is the chance that the two images are the same.
This algorithm should be insensitive to color drift and image rotation. Maybe also scaling (you normalize against the area). But I restate: not an expert, there's probably much better, and it could make kittens cry.
I did something similar to detect movement from a MJPEG stream and record images only when movement occurs.
For each decoded image, I compared to the previous using the following method.
Resize the image to effectively thumbnail size (I resized fairly hi-res images down by a factor of ten
Compare the brightness of each pixel to the previous image and flag if it is much lighter or darker (threshold value 1)
Once you've done that for each pixel, you can use the count of different pixels to determine whether the image is the same or different (threshold value 2)
Then it was just a matter of tuning the two threshold values.
I did the comparisons using System.Drawing.Bitmap, but as my source images were jpg, there were some artifacting.
It's a nice simple way to compare images for differences if you're going to roll it yourself.
If you want to determine if 2 images are the same perceptually, I believe the best way to do it is using an Image Hashing algorithm. You'd compute the hash of both images and you'd be able to use the hashes to get a confidence rating of how much they match.
One that I've had some success with is pHash, though I don't know how easy it would be to use with Visual C. Searching for "Geometric Hashing" or "Image Hashing" might be helpful.
Testing for strict identity is simple: Just compare every pixel in source image A to the corresponding pixel value in image B. If all pixels are identical, the images are identical.
But I guess don't want this kind of strict identity. You probably want images to be "identical" even if certain transformations have been applied to image B. Examples for these transformations might be:
changing image brightness globally (for every pixel)
changing image brightness locally (for every pixel in a certain area)
changing image saturation golbally or locally
gamma correction
applying some kind of filter to the image (e.g. blurring, sharpening)
changing the size of the image
rotation
e.g. printing an image and scanning it again would probably include all of the above.
In a nutshell, you have to decide which transformations you want to treat as "identical" and then find image measures that are invariant to those transformations. (Alternatively, you could try to revert the translations, but that's not possible if the transformation removes information from the image, like e.g. blurring or clipping the image)