Actually, I want five external bounding boxes for the "white" pixels on the following binary image. Desired zones are highlighted with red color.
To get 5th bounding box I'd dilate or blur it. However, dilation will merge zone 3 with zones 1 and 2, so I'll get a bounding box which covers almost entire image. (If I don't dilate or blur it, then cv::findContours + cv::boundingRect will produce a big number of small rectangles.)
In other words, I want only "big enough" bounding boxes.
It's just a sample pattern. Positions of the zones may vary. Is there a way to solve the problem in a general way?
Dilation is done at a per-pixel basis, without regard for the size of the component to which the pixel belongs.
If you want to apply dilation only to small blobs, then you need to remove big blobs before applying the dilation.
So, extract all contours with findContours, then store all contours that are 'big enough' in a list, and paint them black in your source image. Then dilate the modified source and extract the remaining contours.
Note that to get the correct size of the boundingBox, what you probably want is morphological closing (dilation followed by the same amount of erosion), instead of dilation only.
Related
I am trying to detect the regions of traffic signs. Using OpenCV, my approach is as follows:
The color image:
Using the TanTriggs Preprocessing get rid of the illumination variances:
Equalize histogram:
And binarize (Cv2.Threshold(blobs, blobs, 127, 255, ThresholdTypes.BinaryInv):
Iterate each blob using ConnectedComponents and get the mean color value using the blob as mask. If it is a red color then it may be a red sign.
Then get contours of this blob using FindContours.
Simplify the contours using ApproxPolyDP and check the points of each contour:
If 3 points then triangle shape is acceptable --> candidate for triangle sign
If 4 points then shape is acceptable --> candidate
If more than 4 points, BBox dimensions are acceptable and most of the points are on the ellipse fitted (FitEllipse) --> candidate
This approach works for the separated blobs in the binary image, like the circular 100km sign in my example. However if there is a connection to the outside objects, like the triangle left bottom part in the binary image, it fails.
Because, the mean value of this blob is far from red!
Using Erosion helps in some cases, however makes it worse in many of the other images.
Using different threshold values for the binarization also works for some, but fails on many; like the erosion.
Using HoughCircle is just very slow and I couldn't manage to get good results playing with the parameters.
I have tried using matchShapes but couldn't get good results.
Can anybody show me another way the achieve what I want (with a reasonable computational time)?
Any information, or code in any language is wellcome.
Edit:
Using circularity measure (C=P^2/4πA) or the approach I have described above, triangle and ellips shapes can be found when they are separated. However when the contour is like this for example:
I could not find a robust way to extract the triangle piece. If I could, I would check the mean color, and decide if its a red sign candidate.
Sorry, I don't have the kudos to comment, but can't you use the red colour?
import common
myshow = common.myshow
img = cv2.imread("ms0QB.png")
grey = np.zeros(img.shape[:2],np.uint8)
hsv = cv2.cvtColor(img,cv2.COLOR_mask = np.logical_or(hsv[:,:,0]>160,hsv[:,:,0]<10 )
grey[mask] = 255
cv2.imshow("160<hue<182",grey)
cv2.waitKey()
I am trying to detect ROI for a fixed repetitive pattern in an image using opencv C++.
The ROI which I am trying to find - is shown with red boundary as shown in the pic:
I tried canny edge detection after blurring but it detects edge of the vertical/horizontal black and white lines. This is not something I am trying to detect.
What is the best approach to my problem?
Since you're starting with a binary image you could use
findContours()
to get the contours for the individual strips. Since there are a couple of solitary pixels from noise you should then filter for size using
contourArea(contour)
and merge the points of all contours meeting your size criteria into a combined contour. Then get the bounding box for the combined contour:
boundingRect(combinedContour)
I have a customized camera, which contains 3 individual lens+filters arranged in a triangle so in every shot I get 3 single band grayscale images (r, g, b). I want to merge them to get an RGB.
The problem is, since the 3 lens are physically separated, the image captured by them are not aligned. As a result, when I use command qdal_merge in the software pack QGIS, the result looks weird. I may also need to adjust the weight of the r,g,b. I put the raw r,g,b images and the output I generated using qgis in this dropbox folder.
Is there existing open-source tool to do the alignment and merge? If not, how can I do it using opencv?
Combining R,G,B images is possible using a simple pixel intensity distance metric like Sum of Squared Distances (SSD). A better metric is the Normalized Cross-Correlation (NCC) (see Wikipedia) which first normalizes an image matrix into a unit vector, and computes the dot product of such unit vectors (from 2 input images). The higher the NCC value, the greater the similarity of the two input images.
However, NCC similarity may be insufficient for computing the best alignment of two high resolution images, such as the TIFF images you provide. One should therefore use a downsampling method as described below
to align two input images at a smaller size and then simply compute the offset as you rescale the images.
So for the input images, red, green and blue, there are two approaches to align them into a single RGB image:
Consider the blue image as the reference image for example, w.r.t. which we align the red and green images. Now consider red and blue images. Within a certain window, compute the best alignment offset of the red and blue images using the NCC similarity metric, and find the shifted_red image. Do the same for the green and blue images. Now combine the shifted_red, shifted_green and blue images to get the final RGB image.
For high-resolution images, decide a scale_count. Recursively, at each step resize the image by half, compute the offset of the red image w.r.t. the blue image, rescale the offset and apply it. The benefit of doing such a recursive multi-scale alignment is decrease in computation time and increase in accuracy of alignment (you don't know the best window size for searching for alignment offsets for solution (1), so this will work better). Repeat this approach for computing the alignment for green and blue channels, and then combine the final results as in (1).
Since this problem is common in assignments of computational photography courses, I am not going to share any code. I have, however implemented the two approaches and experimented with the images you provide. I don't know which of the input images is red, so I have two results (rescaled to decrease file size):
If IMG_0290_1.tif is Red, IMG_0290_2.tif is Green and IMG_0290_3.tif is blue:
RGB result if red:1, green:2, blue:3
If IMG_0290_3.tif is Red, IMG_0290_2.tif is Green and IMG_0290_1.tif is blue (this looks more correct to me):
RGB result if red:3, green:2, blue:1
I'm new to image processing and I'm working on detecting lines in a document image. I read the theory of Hough line transform but I can't see why I must use Canny before calling that function in opencv like being said in many tutorials. What's the point of finding edges in this case? The fact is that if I don't use Canny or threshold before HoughLines() the results will be very messy. I hope someone will explain for me the reason why.
2 of the tutorials I've read:
Imgproc Feature Detection
Hough Line Transform
Short Answer
cvCanny is used to detect Edges, as well as increase contrast and remove image noise.
HoughLines which uses the Hough Transform is used to determine whether those edges are lines or not. Hough Transform requires edges to be detected well in order to be efficient and provide meaning results.
Long Answer
The Limitations of the Hough Transform are described in more detail on Wikipedia.
The efficiency of the Hough Transform relies of the bin of acculumated pixel being distinct, e.g. a direct contrast between a pixel and its surrounding neighbours or if using a mask region a pixel region and its surrounds regions. If all pixels had similar acculumated values nothing would stand out as a line or circle. This leads to the reduction of colour (colour to grayscale, grayscale to black and white) in order to increase contract.
The number of parameters to the Hough Transform also increase the spread of votes in the pixel bins and increase the complexity of the transform, which mean that normally only lines or circles are reliably detected using it as they have less than 3 parameters.
The edges need to be detected well before running the Hough Transform otherwise its efficiency suffers further. Also noisy images don't work well with Hough transform unless the noise is removed before hand.
First of all, to detect lines you need to work on a boolean matrix image (or binary), I mean: the color is black or white, there's no grayscale.
HoughLines()'s requirement to work properly is to have this kind of image as input. That's the reason you have to use Canny or Treshold, to convert the colored image matrix into a boolean one.
Hough transformation
A line in one picture is actually an edge. Hough transform scans the whole image and using a transformation that converts all white pixel cartesian coordinates in polar coordinates; the black pixels are left out. So you won't be able to get a line if you first don't detect edges, because HoughLines() don't know how to behave when there's a grayscale.
Theoretically, you are correct. Finding edges is not absolutely required for the Hough Line algorithm to work.
The way the Hough works is basically it takes every point and connects it to every other point, and whatever points have the most lines going through them, those lines stay. For this, we need points. The Canny creates those points. Theoretically you could use any sort of filter - isolate all blue or purple points and connect them, whatever - but edges works well.
The Hough also does not weight its lines or points. To the Hough, an image is binary - made up of either 1s or 0, points or not points. There is no need for greyscale, and the canny conveniently returns binary images.
Thus is the Canny always part of the Hough.
all is about processing binary data,
complex data -> (a binary data, b binary data, c binary data, ..) (using canny(),sobel(), etc)
a binary data -> function1() (using houghlines())
b binary data -> function2()
c binary data -> function3() ..
a binary data -X-> function2() ..
complex data -X-> function1() ..
HTH
When we look at a photo of a group of trees, we are able to identify that the photo is predominantly green and brown, or for a picture of the sea we are able to identify that it is mostly blue.
Does anyone know of an algorithm that can be used to detect the prominent color or colours in a photo?
I can envisage a 3D clustering algorithm in RGB space or something similar. I was wondering if someone knows of an existing technique.
Convert the image from RGB to a color space with brightness and saturation separated (HSL/HSV)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSL_and_HSV
Then find the dominating values for the hue component of each pixel. Make a histogram for the hue values of each pixel and analyze in which angle region the peaks fall in. A large peak in the quadrant between 180 and 270 degrees means there is a large portion of blue in the image, for example.
There can be several difficulties in determining one dominant color. Pathological example: an image whose left half is blue and right half is red. Also, the hue will not deal very well with grayscales obviously. So a chessboard image with 50% white and 50% black will suffer from two problems: the hue is arbitrary for a black/white image, and there are two colors that are exactly 50% of the image.
It sounds like you want to start by computing an image histogram or color histogram of the image. The predominant color(s) will be related to the peak(s) in the histogram.
You might want to change the image from RGB to indexed, then you could use a regular histogram and detect the pics (Matlab does this with rgb2ind(), as you probably already know), and then the problem would be reduced to your regular "finding peaks in an array".
Then
n = hist(Y,nbins) bins the elements in vector Y into 10 equally spaced containers and returns the number of elements in each container as a row vector.
Those values in n will give you how many elements in each bin. Then it's just a matter of fiddling with the number of bins to make them wide enough, and with how many elements in each would make you count said bin as a predominant color, then taking the bins that contain those many elements, calculating the index that corresponds with their middle, and converting it to RGB again.
Whatever you're using for your processing probably has similar functions to those
Average all pixels in the image.
Remove all pixels that are farther away from the average color than standard deviation.
GOTO 1 with remaining pixels until arbitrarily few are left (1 or maybe 1%).
You might also want to pre-process the image, for example apply high-pass filter (removing only very low frequencies) to even out lighting in the photo — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_shadow_illusion