I have more then 1 week reading about selective color change of an image. It meand selcting a color from a color picker and then select a part of image in which I want to change the color and apply the changing of color form original color to color of color picker.
E.g. if I select a blue color in color picker and I also select a red part in the image I should be able to change red color to blue color in all the image.
Another example. If I have an image with red apples and oranges and if I select an apple on the image and a blue color in the color picket, then all apples should be changing the color from red to blue.
I have some ideas but of course I need something more concrete on how to do this
Thank you for reading
As a starting point, consider clustering the colors of your image. If you don't know how many clusters you want, then you will need methods to determine whether to merge or not two given clusters. For the moment, let us suppose that we know that number. For example, given the following image at left, I mapped its colors to 3 clusters, which have the mean colors as shown in the middle, and representing each cluster by its mean color gives the figure at right.
With the output at right, now what you need is a method to replace colors. Suppose the user clicks (a single point) somewhere in your image, then you know the positions in the original image that you will need to modify. For the next image, the user (me) clicked on a point that is contained by the "orange" cluster. Then he clicked on some blue hue. From that, you make a mask representing the points in the "orange" cluster and play with that. I considered a simple gaussian filter followed by a flat dilation 3x5. Then you replace the hues in the original image according to the produced mask (after the low pass filtering, the values on it are also considered as a alpha value for compositing the images).
Not perfect at all, but you could have a better clustering than me and also a much-less-primitive color replacement method. I intentionally skipped the details about clustering method, color space, and others, because I used only basic k-means on RGB without any pre-processing of the input. So you can consider the results above as a baseline for anything else you can do.
Given the image, a selected color, and a target new color - you can't do much that isn't ugly. You also need a range, some amount of variation in color, so you can say one pixel's color is "close enough" while another is clearly "different".
First step of processing: You create a mask image, which is grayscale and varying from 0.0 to 1.0 (or from zero to some maximum value we'll treat as 1.0), and the same size as the input image. For each input pixel, test if its color is sufficiently near the selected color. If it's "the same" or "close enough" put 1.0 in the mask. If it's different, put 0.0. If is sorta borderline, put an in-between value. Exactly how to do this depends on the details of the image.
This might work best in LAB space, and testing for sameness according to the angle of the A,B coordinates relative to their origin.
Once you have the mask, put it aside. Now color-transform the whole image. This might be best done in HSV space. Don't touch the V channel. Add a constant to S, modulo 360deg (or mod 256, if S is stored as bytes) and multiply S by a constant chosen so that the coordinates in HSV corresponding to the selected color is moved to the HSV coordinates for the target color. Convert the transformed S and H, with the unchanged L, back to RGB.
Finally, use the mask to blend the original image with the color-transformed one. Apply this to each channel - red, green, blue:
output = (1-mask)*original + mask*transformed
If you're doing it all in byte arrays, 0 is 0.0 and 255 is 1.0, and be careful of overflow and signed/unsigned problems.
Related
Sorry for the bad title I don't really know how could I write it better. I want to create a colorpicker that's not very typical. There is the version where you can select the three vectors of HSB. It would be close to it but not at all. The main problem is why I don't use the usual colorpickers is that I have a very specific space to do it. I have 35 free objects that could be colored (these are filled circles with a black border) and not more. But I can place each object wherever I want. So how I imagine there would be a circle of 12-18 objects that are constats they would represent the HUE than when I select one the rest of the objects would be in the HUE circle and they would form a square. And why I call it tree: because you could select a color from the main circle than you get colors from that branch than you click on one of the colors in the got colors than you get colors from that color (but the clicked color is always part of the "zoomed" colors the best how you can imagine this like there is the HSB color space and in the first two clicks you select the HUE than you just zoom in the HSB color space than there is the two dimensional 101*101 S and B square and we zoom on the color. I really hope that you can understand me if not ask anything. And thank you for reading this long text.
Something like this:
The first, must know what is equation of HSB Color. The Algorithm to find this is in this with name HSV.
If you found, You can fill each color with choosen formula with hue you choosen and full saturation.
Add listener of click for that circle.
In listener, update the cicle inside with your choosen saturation and brighness. For example first row is sqaturation and brightness is column. Then in row 1 is no saturation, row 2 is half saturated(50) and row 3 is full saturated ones. The column 1 is the brightmost one(100) the 2 is half(50) and 3 is no brightness (0), for example.
Aclually it is not a tree, but a alternative approach for standard approach because it's more like that than tree.
I got a png image like this:
The blue color is represent transparent. And all the circle is a pixel group. So, I would like to find the biggest one, and remove all the small pixel, which is not group with the biggest one. In this example, the biggest one is red colour circle, and I will retain it. But the green and yellow are to small, so I will remove them. After that, I will have something like this:
Any ideas? Thanks.
If you consider only the size of objects, use the following algorithm: labellize the connex components of the mask image of the objects (all object pixels are white, transparent ones are black). Then compute the areas of the connex components, and filter them. At this step, you have a label map and a list of authorized labels. You can read the label map and overwrite the mask image with setting every pixel to white if it has an authorized label.
OpenCV does not seem to have a labelling function, but cvFloodFill can do the same thing with several calls: for each unlabeled white pixel, call FloodFill with this pixel as marker. Then you can store the result of this step in an array (of the size of the image) by assigning each newly assigned pixel with its label. Repeat this as long as you have unlabellized pixels.
Else you can recode the connex component function for binary images, this algorithm is well known and easy to implement (maybe start with Matlab's bwlabel).
The handiest way to filter objects if you have an a priori knowledge of their size is to use morphological operators. In your case, with opencv, once you've loaded your image (OpenCV supports PNG), you have to do an "openning", that is an erosion followed by a dilation.
The small objects (smaller than the size of the structuring element you chose) will disappear with erosion, while the bigger will remain and be restored with the dilation.
(reference here, cv::morphologyEx).
The shape of the big object might be altered. If you're only doing detection, it is harmless, but if you want your object to avoid transformation you'll need to apply a "top hat" transform.
I am playing with computer graphics programming for the first time. I want to convert RGB (24-bit) images to indexed-palette (8-bit) images (like GIF). My initial thought is to use k-means (with k=256).
How would one go about picking the optimal palette for a given image? This is a learning experience for me, so I would prefer an overview-type answer to source code.
Edit: Dithering is currently off-topic. I am only referring to "simple" color conversion, psycho-visual/perceptual models aside; color-space is also currently off-topic, though moving between color-spaces is what got me thinking about this in the first place :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_quantization
Octree
Median-cut
K-means
Gamut subdivision
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~dcoetzee/downloads/scolorq/
The reference links people have provided are good, and there are several solutions to this problem, but since I've been working on this problem recently (with complete ignorance as to how others have solved it), I offer my approach in plain English:
Firstly, realize that (human perceived) color is 3-dimensional. This is fundamentally because the human eye has 3 distinct receptors: red, green, and blue. Likewise your monitor has red, green, and blue pixel elements. Other representations, like, hue, saturation, luminance (HSL) can be used, but basically all representations are 3-dimensional.
This means RGB color space is a cube, with red, green, and blue axes. From a 24-bit source image, this cube has 256 discrete levels on each axis. A naive approach to reducing the image to 8-bit is to simply reduce the levels per axis. For instance, an 8x8x4 cube palette with 8 levels for red and green, 4 levels for blue is easily created by taking the high 3 bits of the red and green values, and the high 2 bits of the blue value. This is easy to implement, but has several disadvantages. In the resulting 256 color palette, many entries will not be used at all. If the image has detail using very subtle color shifts, these shifts will disappear as the colors snap into the same palette entry.
An adaptive palette approach needs to account for not just averaged/common colors in the image, but which areas of color space have the greatest variance. That is, an image that has thousands of subtle shades of light green requires a different palette than an image that has thousands of pixels of exactly the same shade of light green, since the latter would ideally use a single palette entry for that color.
To this end, I took an approach that results in 256 buckets containing exactly the same number of distinct values each. So if the original image contained 256000 distinct 24-bit colors, this algorithm results in 256 buckets each containing 1000 of the original values. This is accomplished by binary spatial partitioning of color space using the median of distinct values present (not the mean).
In English, this means we first divide the whole color cube into the half of pixels with less than the median red value and the half with more than the median red value. Then, divide each resulting half by green value, then by blue, and so on. Each split requires a single bit to indicate the lower or higher half of pixels. After 8 splits, variance has effectively been split into 256 equally important clusters in color space.
In psuedo-code:
// count distinct 24-bit colors from the source image
// to minimize resources, an array of arrays is used
paletteRoot = {colors: [ [color0,count],[color1,count], ...]} // root node has all values
for (i=0; i<8; i++) {
colorPlane = i%3 // red,green,blue,red,green,blue,red,green
nodes = leafNodes(paletteRoot) // on first pass, this is just the root itself
for (node in nodes) {
node.colors.sort(colorPlane) // sort by red, green, or blue
node.lo = { colors: node.colors[0..node.colors.length/2] }
node.hi = { colors: node.colors[node.colors.length/2..node.colors.length] }
delete node.colors // free up space! otherwise will explode memory
node.splitColor = node.hi.colors[0] // remember the median color used to partition
node.colorPlane = colorPlane // remember which color this node split on
}
}
You now have 256 leaf nodes, each containing the same number of distinct colors from the original image, clustered spatially in the color cube. To assign each node a single color, find the weighted average using the color counts. The weighting is an optimization that improves perceptual color matching, but is not that important. Make sure to average each color channel independently. The results are excellent. Note that it is intentional that blue is divided once less than red and green, since the blue receptors in the eye are less sensitive to subtle changes than red and green.
There are other optimizations possible. By using HSL you could instead put the higher quantizing in the luminance dimension instead of blue. Also the above algorithm will slightly reduce overall dynamic range (since it ultimately averages color values), so dynamically expanding the resulting palette is another possibility.
EDIT:
updated to support palette of 256 colors
If you need simplest method then I would suggest histogram based approach:
Calculate histograms of R/G/B channels
Define 4 intensity ranges
For each channel in intensity range
Split histogram into 4 equal parts
For each histogram part
Extract most frequent value of that part
Now you will have 4*4^3=256 colors palette. When assigning pixel to palette color, just calculate average intensity of pixel to see what intensity region you must use. After that just map one of those 64 colors of intensity region to pixel value.
Good luck.
This might be a little late to answer, but try this:
make a set of each color in the image,
sort them according to red, then green then blue (if preceding channels are equal), (they are now into a list)
suppress nearby colors if they are too similar, ie distance in rgb space is smaller than 4.
if they are still to much colors, suppress the least used ones.
Each time you supress a color, you will have to add into a hash_map the colors and it's destination.
I am playing with computer graphics programming for the first time. I want to convert RGB (24-bit) images to indexed-palette (8-bit) images (like GIF). My initial thought is to use k-means (with k=256).
How would one go about picking the optimal palette for a given image? This is a learning experience for me, so I would prefer an overview-type answer to source code.
Edit: Dithering is currently off-topic. I am only referring to "simple" color conversion, psycho-visual/perceptual models aside; color-space is also currently off-topic, though moving between color-spaces is what got me thinking about this in the first place :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_quantization
Octree
Median-cut
K-means
Gamut subdivision
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~dcoetzee/downloads/scolorq/
The reference links people have provided are good, and there are several solutions to this problem, but since I've been working on this problem recently (with complete ignorance as to how others have solved it), I offer my approach in plain English:
Firstly, realize that (human perceived) color is 3-dimensional. This is fundamentally because the human eye has 3 distinct receptors: red, green, and blue. Likewise your monitor has red, green, and blue pixel elements. Other representations, like, hue, saturation, luminance (HSL) can be used, but basically all representations are 3-dimensional.
This means RGB color space is a cube, with red, green, and blue axes. From a 24-bit source image, this cube has 256 discrete levels on each axis. A naive approach to reducing the image to 8-bit is to simply reduce the levels per axis. For instance, an 8x8x4 cube palette with 8 levels for red and green, 4 levels for blue is easily created by taking the high 3 bits of the red and green values, and the high 2 bits of the blue value. This is easy to implement, but has several disadvantages. In the resulting 256 color palette, many entries will not be used at all. If the image has detail using very subtle color shifts, these shifts will disappear as the colors snap into the same palette entry.
An adaptive palette approach needs to account for not just averaged/common colors in the image, but which areas of color space have the greatest variance. That is, an image that has thousands of subtle shades of light green requires a different palette than an image that has thousands of pixels of exactly the same shade of light green, since the latter would ideally use a single palette entry for that color.
To this end, I took an approach that results in 256 buckets containing exactly the same number of distinct values each. So if the original image contained 256000 distinct 24-bit colors, this algorithm results in 256 buckets each containing 1000 of the original values. This is accomplished by binary spatial partitioning of color space using the median of distinct values present (not the mean).
In English, this means we first divide the whole color cube into the half of pixels with less than the median red value and the half with more than the median red value. Then, divide each resulting half by green value, then by blue, and so on. Each split requires a single bit to indicate the lower or higher half of pixels. After 8 splits, variance has effectively been split into 256 equally important clusters in color space.
In psuedo-code:
// count distinct 24-bit colors from the source image
// to minimize resources, an array of arrays is used
paletteRoot = {colors: [ [color0,count],[color1,count], ...]} // root node has all values
for (i=0; i<8; i++) {
colorPlane = i%3 // red,green,blue,red,green,blue,red,green
nodes = leafNodes(paletteRoot) // on first pass, this is just the root itself
for (node in nodes) {
node.colors.sort(colorPlane) // sort by red, green, or blue
node.lo = { colors: node.colors[0..node.colors.length/2] }
node.hi = { colors: node.colors[node.colors.length/2..node.colors.length] }
delete node.colors // free up space! otherwise will explode memory
node.splitColor = node.hi.colors[0] // remember the median color used to partition
node.colorPlane = colorPlane // remember which color this node split on
}
}
You now have 256 leaf nodes, each containing the same number of distinct colors from the original image, clustered spatially in the color cube. To assign each node a single color, find the weighted average using the color counts. The weighting is an optimization that improves perceptual color matching, but is not that important. Make sure to average each color channel independently. The results are excellent. Note that it is intentional that blue is divided once less than red and green, since the blue receptors in the eye are less sensitive to subtle changes than red and green.
There are other optimizations possible. By using HSL you could instead put the higher quantizing in the luminance dimension instead of blue. Also the above algorithm will slightly reduce overall dynamic range (since it ultimately averages color values), so dynamically expanding the resulting palette is another possibility.
EDIT:
updated to support palette of 256 colors
If you need simplest method then I would suggest histogram based approach:
Calculate histograms of R/G/B channels
Define 4 intensity ranges
For each channel in intensity range
Split histogram into 4 equal parts
For each histogram part
Extract most frequent value of that part
Now you will have 4*4^3=256 colors palette. When assigning pixel to palette color, just calculate average intensity of pixel to see what intensity region you must use. After that just map one of those 64 colors of intensity region to pixel value.
Good luck.
This might be a little late to answer, but try this:
make a set of each color in the image,
sort them according to red, then green then blue (if preceding channels are equal), (they are now into a list)
suppress nearby colors if they are too similar, ie distance in rgb space is smaller than 4.
if they are still to much colors, suppress the least used ones.
Each time you supress a color, you will have to add into a hash_map the colors and it's destination.
Using images of articles of clothing taken against a consistent background, I would like to make all pixels in the image transparent except for the clothing. What is the best way to go about this? I have researched the algorithms that are common for this and the open source library opencv. Aside from rolling my own or using opencv is there an easy way to do this? I am open to any language or platform.
Thanks
If your background is consistend in an image but inconsistent across images it could get tricky, but here is what I would do:
Separate the image into some intensity/colour form such as YUV or Lab.
Make a histogram over the colour part. Find the most occuring colour, this is (most likely) your background (update) maybe a better trick here would be to find the most occuring colour of all pixels within one or two pixels from the edge of the image.
Starting from the eddges of the image, set all pixels that have that colour and are connected to the edge through pixels of that colour to transparent.
The edge of the piece of clothing is now going to look a bit ugly because it consist of pixels that gain their colour from both the background and the piece of clothing. To combat this you need to do a bit more work:
Find the edge of the piece of clothing through some edge detection mechanism.
Replace the colour of the edge pixels with a blend of the colour just "inside" the edge pixel (i.e. the colour of the clothing in that region) and transparent (if your output image format supports that).
If you want to get really fancy, you increase the transparency depending on how much "like" the background colour the colour of that pixel is.
Basically, find the color of the background and subtract it, but I guess you knew this. It's a little tricky to do this all automatically, but it seems possible.
First, take a look at blob detection with OpenCV and see if this is basically done for you.
To do it yourself:
find the background: There are several options. Probably easiest is to histogram the image, and the large number of pixels with similar values are the background, and if there are two large collections, the background will be the one with a big hole in the middle. Another approach is to take a band around the perimeter as the background color, but this seems inferior as, for example, reflection from a flash could dramatically brighten more centrally located background pixels.
remove the background: a first take at this would be to threshold the image based on the background color, and then run the "open" or "close" algorithms on this, and then use this as a mask to select your clothing article. (The point of open/close is to not remove small background colored items on the clothing, like black buttons on a white blouse, or, say, bright reflections on black clothing.)
OpenCV is a good tool for this.
The trickiest part of this will probably be at the shadow around the object (e.g. a black jacket on a white background will have a continuous gray shadow at some of the edges and where to make this cut?), but if you get this far, post another question.
if you know the exact color intensity of the background and it will never change and the articles of clothing will never coincide with this color, then this is a simple application of background subtraction, that is everything that is not a particular color intensity is considered an "on" pixel, one of interest. You can then use connected component labeling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connected_Component_Labeling) to figure out seperate groupings of objects.
for a color image, with the same background on every pictures:
convert your image to HSV or HSL
determine the Hue value of the background (+/-10): do this step once, using photoshop for example, then use the same value on all your pictures.
perform a color threshold: on the hue channel exclude the hue of the background ([0,hue[ + ]hue, 255] typically), for all other channels include the whole value range (0 to 255 typically). this will select pixels which are NOT the background.
perform a "fill holes" operation (normally found along blob analysis or labelling functions) to complete the part of the clothes which may have been of the same color than the background.
now you have an image which is a "mask" of the clothes: non-zero pixels represents the clothes, 0 pixels represents the background.
this step of the processing depends on how you want to make pixels transparent: typically, if you save your image as PNG with an alpha (transparency) channel, use a logical AND (also called "masking") operation between the alpha channel of the original image and the mask build in the previous step.
voilà, the background disappeared, save the resulting image.