I need to be able to detect spots on sample tiles. The spots themselves are applied to the sample tiles by hand and as such are not particularly regular in shape or position.
I've been playing around with Aforge.NET's blob detection and have had some limited success using the ChannelFiltering and ColorFiltering filters. However, to do this I need to manually define a range of RGB values that match the spot colors on the example image. This simply won't work in the Real World, where factors such as lighting conditions and problems with the fabrication of the sample tiles will come into effect.
I'm guessing I should initially convert the image to grayscale and then apply a series of filters or other operations before I run the blob detection algorithm, but I'm at a loss as to what these should be.
Are there some best practices for circle/blob detection?
EDIT: fixed links.
Related
I was wondering if its possible to match the exposure across a set of images.
For example, lets say you have 5 images that were taken at different angles. Images 1-3,5 are taken with the same exposure whilst the 4th image have a slightly darker exposure. When I then try to combine these into a cylindrical panorama using (seamFinder with: gc_color, surf detection, MULTI_BAND blending,Wave correction, etc.) the result turns out with a big shadow in the middle due to the darkness from image 4.
I've also tried using exposureCompensator without luck.
Since I'm taking the pictures in iOS, I maybe could increase exposure manually when needed? But this doesn't seem optimal..
Have anyone else dealt with this problem?
This method is probably overkill (and not just a little) but the current state-of-the-art method for ensuring color consistency between different images is presented in this article from HaCohen et al.
Their algorithm can correct a wide range of errors in image sets. I have implemented and tested it on datasets with large errors and it performs very well.
But, once again, I suppose this is way overkill for panorama stitching.
Sunreef has provided a very good paper, but it does seem overkill because of the complexity of a possible implementation.
What you want to do is to equalize the exposure not on the entire images, but on the overlapping zones. If the histograms of the overlapped zones match, it is a good indicator that the images have similar brightness and exposure conditions. Since you are doing more than 1 stitch, you may require a global equalization in order to make all the images look similar, and then only equalize them using either a weighted equalization on the overlapped region or a quadratic optimiser (which is again overkill if you are not a professional photographer). OpenCV has a simple implmentation of a simple equalization compensation algorithm.
The detail::ExposureCompensator class of OpenCV (sample implementation of such a stitiching is here) would be ideal for you to use.
Just create a compensator (try the 2 different types of compensation: GAIN and GAIN_BLOCKS)
Feed the images into the compensator, based on where their top-left cornes lie (in the stitched image) along with a mask (which can be either completely white or white only in the overlapped region).
Apply compensation on each individual image and iteratively check the results.
I don't know any way to do this in iOS, just OpenCV.
Context:
I have the RGB-D video from a Kinect, which is aimed straight down at a table. There is a library of around 12 objects I need to identify, alone or several at a time. I have been working with SURF extraction and detection from the RGB image, preprocessing by downscaling to 320x240, grayscale, stretching the contrast and balancing the histogram before applying SURF. I built a lasso tool to choose among detected keypoints in a still of the video image. Then those keypoints are used to build object descriptors which are used to identify objects in the live video feed.
Problem:
SURF examples show successful identification of objects with a decent amount of text-like feature detail eg. logos and patterns. The objects I need to identify are relatively plain but have distinctive geometry. The SURF features found in my stills are sometimes consistent but mostly unimportant surface features. For instance, say I have a wooden cube. SURF detects a few bits of grain on one face, then fails on other faces. I need to detect (something like) that there are four corners at equal distances and right angles. None of my objects has much of a pattern but all have distinctive symmetric geometry and color. Think cellphone, lollipop, knife, bowling pin. My thought was that I could build object descriptors for each significantly different-looking orientation of the object, eg. two descriptors for a bowling pin: one standing up and one laying down. For a cellphone, one laying on the front and one on the back. My recognizer needs rotational invariance and some degree of scale invariance in case objects are stacked. Ability to deal with some occlusion is preferable (SURF behaves well enough) but not the most important characteristic. Skew invariance would be preferable and SURF does well with paper printouts of my objects held by hand at a skew.
Questions:
Am I using the wrong SURF parameters to find features at the wrong scale? Is there a better algorithm for this kind of object identification? Is there something as readily usable as SURF that uses the depth data from the Kinect along with or instead of the RGB data?
I was doing something similar for a project, and ended up using a super simple method for object recognition, which was using OpenCV blob detection, and recognizing objects based on their areas. Obviously, there needs to be enough variance for this method to work.
You can see my results here: http://portfolio.jackkalish.com/Secondhand-Stories
I know there are other methods out there, one possible solution for you could be approxPolyDP, which is described here:
How to detect simple geometric shapes using OpenCV
Would love to hear about your progress on this!
I had asked this on photo stackexchange but thought it might be relevant here as well, since I want to implement this programatically in my implementation.
I am trying to implement a blur detection algorithm for my imaging pipeline. The blur that I want to detect is both -
1) Camera Shake: Pictures captured using hand which moves/shakes when shutter speed is less.
2) Lens focussing errors - (Depth of Field) issues, like focussing on a incorrect object causing some blur.
3) Motion blur: Fast moving objects in the scene, captured using a not high enough shutter speed. E.g. A moving car a night might show a trail of its headlight/tail light in the image as a blur.
How can one detect this blur and quantify it in some way to make some decision based on that computed 'blur metric'?
What is the theory behind blur detection?
I am looking of good reading material using which I can implement some algorithm for this in C/Matlab.
thank you.
-AD.
Motion blur and camera shake are kind of the same thing when you think about the cause: relative motion of the camera and the object. You mention slow shutter speed -- it is a culprit in both cases.
Focus misses are subjective as they depend on the intent on the photographer. Without knowing what the photographer wanted to focus on, it's impossible to achieve this. And even if you do know what you wanted to focus on, it still wouldn't be trivial.
With that dose of realism aside, let me reassure you that blur detection is actually a very active research field, and there are already a few metrics that you can try out on your images. Here are some that I've used recently:
Edge width. Basically, perform edge detection on your image (using Canny or otherwise) and then measure the width of the edges. Blurry images will have wider edges that are more spread out. Sharper images will have thinner edges. Google for "A no-reference perceptual blur metric" by Marziliano -- it's a famous paper that describes this approach well enough for a full implementation. If you're dealing with motion blur, then the edges will be blurred (wide) in the direction of the motion.
Presence of fine detail. Have a look at my answer to this question (the edited part).
Frequency domain approaches. Taking the histogram of the DCT coefficients of the image (assuming you're working with JPEG) would give you an idea of how much fine detail the image has. This is how you grab the DCT coefficients from a JPEG file directly. If the count for the non-DC terms is low, it is likely that the image is blurry. This is the simplest way -- there are more sophisticated approaches in the frequency domain.
There are more, but I feel that that should be enough to get you started. If you require further info on either of those points, fire up Google Scholar and look around. In particular, check out the references of Marziliano's paper to get an idea about what has been tried in the past.
There is a great paper called : "analysis of focus measure operators for shape-from-focus" (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234073157_Analysis_of_focus_measure_operators_in_shape-from-focus) , which does a comparison about 30 different techniques.
Out of all the different techniques, the "Laplacian" based methods seem to have the best performance. Most image processing programs like : MATLAB or OPENCV have already implemented this method . Below is an example using OpenCV : http://www.pyimagesearch.com/2015/09/07/blur-detection-with-opencv/
One important point to note here is that an image can have some blurry areas and some sharp areas. For example, if an image contains portrait photography, the image in the foreground is sharp whereas the background is blurry. In sports photography, the object in focus is sharp and the background usually has motion blur. One way to detect such a spatially varying blur in an image is to run a frequency domain analysis at every location in the image. One of the papers which addresses this topic is "Spatially-Varying Blur Detection Based on Multiscale Fused and Sorted Transform Coefficients of Gradient Magnitudes" (cvpr2017).
the authors look at multi resolution DCT coefficients at every pixel. These DCT coefficients are divided into low, medium, and high frequency bands, out of which only the high frequency coefficients are selected.
The DCT coefficients are then fused together and sorted to form the multiscale-fused and sorted high-frequency transform coefficients
A subset of these coefficients are selected. the number of selected coefficients is a tunable parameter which is application specific.
The selected subset of coefficients are then sent through a max pooling block to retain the highest activation within all the scales. This gives the blur map as the output, which is then sent through a post processing step to refine the map.
This blur map can be used to quantify the sharpness in various regions of the image. In order to get a single global metric to quantify the bluriness of the entire image, the mean of this blur map or the histogram of this blur map can be used
Here are some examples results on how the algorithm performs:
The sharp regions in the image have a high intensity in the blur_map, whereas blurry regions have a low intensity.
The github link to the project is: https://github.com/Utkarsh-Deshmukh/Spatially-Varying-Blur-Detection-python
The python implementation of this algorithm can be found on pypi which can easily be installed as shown below:
pip install blur_detector
A sample code snippet to generate the blur map is as follows:
import blur_detector
import cv2
if __name__ == '__main__':
img = cv2.imread('image_name', 0)
blur_map = blur_detector.detectBlur(img, downsampling_factor=4, num_scales=4, scale_start=2, num_iterations_RF_filter=3)
cv2.imshow('ori_img', img)
cv2.imshow('blur_map', blur_map)
cv2.waitKey(0)
For detecting blurry images, you can tweak the approach and add "Region of Interest estimation".
In this github link: https://github.com/Utkarsh-Deshmukh/Blurry-Image-Detector , I have used local entropy filters to estimate a region of interest. In this ROI, I then use DCT coefficients as feature extractors and train a simple multi-layer perceptron. On testing this approach on 20000 images in the "BSD-B" dataset (http://cg.postech.ac.kr/research/realblur/) I got an average accuracy of 94%
Just to add on the focussing errors, these may be detected by comparing the psf of the captured blurry images (wider) with reference ones (sharper). Deconvolution techniques may help correcting them but leaving artificial errors (shadows, rippling, ...). A light field camera can help refocusing to any depth planes since it captures the angular information besides the traditional spatial ones of the scene.
I'm trying to extract objects from scanned images. There could be a few documents on a white background, and I need to crop and rotate them automatically. This seems like a rather simple task, but I've got stuck at some point and get bad results all the time.
I've tried to:
Binarise the image and get connected components by performing morphological operations.
Perform watershed segmentation by using dilated and eroded binary images as mask components.
Apply Canny detector and fill the contours.
None of this gets me good results. If the object does't have contrast edges (i.e a piece of paper on white background), it splits into a lot of separate components. If I connect these components by applying excessive dilation, background noise also expands and everything becomes a mess.
For example, I have an image:
After applying Canny detector and filling the contours I get something like this:
As you can see, the components are not connected. They are eve too far from each other to be connected by a reasonable amount of dilation. And when I apply watershed to this mask combined with some background points, it yields very bad results.
Some images are noisy:
In this particular case I was able to obtain contour of the whole passport by Canny detector because of it's contrast edges. But threshold method doesn't work here.
If the images are always on a very light background, then you can binarize with a threshold close to the maximum possible value. After that it is a matter of correcting the binary image to get the objects, but this step will vary depending on how your other images look like.
For instance, the following image at left is what we get with a threshold at 99% of the maximum value after a gaussian filtering on the input. After removing components connected to the border and other small components, and also combining with some basic morphological tools, we get the image at right.
This may seem a bit wishy-washy but bear with me:
This looks like quite a challenging case for image processing recipes involving only edge detection, morphological operations and segmentation.
What you are not exploiting here is that you (I believe) know what your document should look like. You are currently looking at completely general solutions which do not take into account this prior knowledge. If you can get some training data then you can go all the way from simple template/patch-based matching (SSD, Normalized Cross-Correlation) to more sophisticated object detection techniques to find the position and rotation of your documents.
My guess is that if your objects are always more or less the same and at the same scale (e.g. passports scanned at a fixed resolution/similar machines) then you can get away with a fairly crude approach. There won't be any one correct method. It's also likely that the technique you end up using will not work until you have done a significant amount of parameter tweaking, so don't give up on anything too quickly.
I am trying to do object recognition using algorithms such as SURF, FERN, FREAK in opencv 2.4.2.
I am using the programs from opencv samples without modifications - find_obj.cpp, find_obj_ferns.cpp, freak_demo.cpp
I tried changing the parameters for the algorithms which didn't help.
I have my training images, test images and the result of FREAK recognition here
As you can see the result is pretty bad.
No feature descriptors is detected for one of the training image - image here
Feature descriptors are detected outside the object boundary for the other - image here
I have a few questions:
Why does these algorithms work with grayscale images ? It is apparent that for my above training images, the object can be detected easily if RGB is included. Is there any technique that takes this into account.
Is there any other way to improve performance. I tried fiddling with feature parameters which didn't work well.
First thing i observed in your image is, object is plane and no texture differences are there...I mean all the feature detectors you used are for finding corners which are view invariant, it means those are the keypoints in an image which are having unique neighborhood and good magnitude of x and y derivatives. I have uploaded my analysis...see the figures
How to know what I am saying is correct?
Just go to the descriptor values of a keypoint you find over your object and see the values, you will see most of them are zeros...Because a descriptor is the description of variation of the edges around a corner point in a specific direction (see surf documentation for more details).
The object you are trying to detect is looking like a mobile phone, so you just reverse the object or mobile and repeat the experiment and you will surely get good results...Because on front side generally objects have more texture like switches, logos etc..
Here is a result I uploaded,