I have an image that I used to analyze in LabView using a method called Rake. Basically, what that method does is it finds all the significant edges along parallel lines on an image.
http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/370281P-01/imaqvision/imaq_rake_3/ (as seen on the last image at the bottom of the link).
The beauty of this function is that it will give you all edge points that are larger than a certain edge strength, and each edge will only generate one edge point (thickness of the edge line is 1 pixel)
I want to use OpenCV to do something similar. The way I could imagine for doing this is
- deconstructing the Canny operator with a filter of my choice,
- hysterisis thresholding of the edge values with two thresholds
- followed by nonmaxima suppression
- read the pixels along that line and mark all pixels that are larger than my threshold
the problem is that the canny comes as a bundle and I cant find the nonmaxima suppression function by itself.
Does anybody know of a way to do something similar to the operation I've described?
Thanks
Not sure if I understand this question fully, but about the unbundled non-maximum suppression part:
One simple way for 2d non-maximum suppression is this:
dilate the image. Dilation in OpenCV sets the value of each pixel to the max() of the local neighborhood. Repeat a few times or use a larger kernel to get the desired radius.
Then compare the dilated image with the original and set all pixels with differing values to zero.
The remaining pixels are local maxima.
# some code I once used in OpenCV/Python
# given an image, sets all pixels to zero, unless they are local maxima
def supressNonMaxima(img):
localMax = cvCreateImage (cvGetSize(img), IPL_DEPTH_16U, 1)
cvDilate(img, localMax, null, 3) # max() with radius of 3
mask = cvCreateImage( cvGetSize(img), 8, 1)
cvCmp(img, localMax, mask, CV_CMP_LT)
cvSet(img,0,mask)
Related
I have a binary image below:
it's an image of random abstract picture, and by using matlab, what I wanna do is to detect, how many peaks does it have so I'll know that there are roughly 5 objects in it.
As you can see, there are, 5 peaks in it, so it means there are 5 objects in it.
I've tried using imregionalmax(), but I don't find it usefull, since my image already in binary image. I also tried to use regionprops('Area'), but it shows wrong number since there is no exact whitespace between each object. Thanks in advance
An easy way to do this would be to simply sum across the rows for each column and find the peaks of the result using findpeaks. In the example below, I have opted to use the inverse of the image which will result in positive peaks where the columns are.
rowSum = sum(1 - image, 1);
If we plot this, it looks like the bottom plot
We can then use findpeaks to identify the peaks in this plot. We will apply a 5-point moving average to it to help eliminate false peaks.
[peaks, locations, widths, prominences] = findpeaks(smooth(rowSum));
You can then select the "true" peaks by thresholding based on any of these outputs. For this example we can use prominences and find the more prominent peaks.
isPeak = prominences > 50;
nPeaks = sum(isPeak)
5
Then we can plot the peaks locations to confirm
plot(locations(isPeak), peaks(isPeak), 'r*');
If you have some prior knowledge about the expected widths of the peaks, you could adjust the smooth span to match this expected width and obtain some cleaner peaks when using findpeaks.
Using an expected width of 40 for your image, findpeaks was able to perfectly detect all 5 peaks with no false positive.
findpeaks(smooth(rowSum, 40));
As your they are peaks, they are vertical structures. So in this particular case, you case use projection histograms (also know as histogram projection function): you make all the black pixels fall as if they were effected by gravity. Then you will find a curve of black pixels on the bottom of your image. Then you can count the number of peaks.
Here is the algorithm:
Invert the image (black is normally the absence of information)
Histogram projection
Closing and opening in order to clean the signal and get the final result.
You can add a maxima detection to get the top of the peaks.
Here is an example of binary images, i.e. as input we have an imageByteArray with 2 possible values: 0 and 255.
Example1:
Example2:
The image contains some document edge on a background.
The task is to remove, decrease amount of background pixels with minimal impact on edge pixels.
The question is what modern algorithms, techniques exist to do this?
What I do not expect as an answer: use Gaussian blur to get rid of background noise, use bitonal algorithm (Canny, Sobel, etc.) thresholds or use Hough (Hough linearization goes crazy on such noise no matter what options are set)
The simplest solution is to detect all contours and filter out ones with the lowest length. This works good, but sometimes depending on an image it will also erase useful edge pixels pretty much.
Update:
As input I have standard RGB image with a document (driver license ID, check, bill, credit card, ...) on some background. The main task is to detect document edges. Next steps are pretty known: greyscale, blur, Sobel binarization, Hough probabilistic, find rectangle or trapezium (if trapezium shape found then go to perspective transformation). On simple contrast backgrounds it all works fine. The reason why I am asking about noise reduction is that I have to work with thousands of backgrounds and some of them give noise no matter what options used. The noise will cause additional lines no matter how Hough is configured and additional lines may fool subsequent logic and seriously affect performance. (It is implemented in java script, no OpenCV or GPU support).
It's hard to know whether this approach will work with all your images since you only provided one, but a Hough Line detection with ImageMagick and these parameters in the Terminal command-line produces this:
convert card.jpg \
\( +clone -background none -fill red -stroke red \
-strokewidth 2 -hough-lines 49x49+100 -write lines.mvg \
\) -composite hough.png
and the file lines.mvg contains 4 lines as follows:
# Hough line transform: 49x49+100
viewbox 0 0 1024 765
line 168.14,0 141.425,765 # 215
line 0,155.493 1024,191.252 # 226
line 0,653.606 1024,671.48 # 266
line 940.741,0 927.388,765 # 158
ImageMagick is installed on most Linux distros and is available for OSX and Windows from here.
I assume you did mean binary image instead of bitonic...
Do flood fill based segmentation
scan image for set pixels (color=255)
for each set pixel create a mask/map of its area
Just flood fill set pixels with 4 or 8 neighbor connection and count how many pixels you filled.
for each filled area compute its bounding box
detect edge lines
edge lines have rectangular bounding box so test its aspect ratio if close to square then this is not edge line
also too small bounding box means not an edge line
too small filled pixels count in comparison to bounding box bigger side size then area is also not an edge line
You can make this more robust if you regress line for set pixels of each area and compute the average distance between regressed line and each set pixel. If too high area is not edge line ...
recolor not edge lines areas to black
so either substract the mask from image or flood fill with black again ...
[notes]
Sometimes step #5 can mess the inside of document. In that case you do not recolor anything instead you remember all the regressed lines for edge areas. Then after whole process is done join together all lines that are parallel and close to same axis (infinite line) that should reduce to 4 big lines determining document rectangle. So now fill with black all outside pixels (by geometric approach)
For such tasks you would usually carefully examine input data and try to figure out what cues can you utilize. But unfortunately you have provided only one example, which makes this approach pretty useless. Besides, this representation is not really comfortable to work with - have you done some preprocessing, or this is what you get as input? In first case, you may get better advice if you can show us real input.
Next, if your goal is noise reduction and not document/background segmentation - you are really limited in options. Similar to what you said, I would try to detect connected components with 255 intensity (instead of detecting contours, which can be less robust) and remove ones with small area. That may fail on certain instances.
Besides, on image you have provided you can use local statistics to suppress areas of regular noise. This will reduce background clutter if you select neighborhood size appropriately.
But again, if you are doing this for document detection - there may be more robust approaches.
For example, if you know the foreground object (driver's ID) - you can try to collect a dataset of ID images, and calculate the 'typical' color histogram - it may be rather characteristic. After that, you can backproject this histogram on input image and get either rough region of interest, or maybe even precise mask. Then you may binarize it and try to detect contours. You may try different color spaces and bin sizes to see which fits best.
If you have to work in different lighting conditions you can try to equalize histogram or do some other preprocessing to reduce color variation caused by lighting.
Strictly answering the question for the binary image (i.e. after the harm as been made):
What seems characteristic of the edge pixels as opposed to noise is that they form (relatively) long and smooth chains.
So far I see no better way than tracing all chains of 8-connected pixels, for instance with a contour following algorithm, and detect the straight sections, for example by Douglas-Peucker simplification.
As the noise is only on the outside of the card, the outline of the blobs will have at least one "clean" section. Keep the sections that are long enough.
This may destroy the curved corners as well and actually you should look for the "smooth" paths that are long enough.
Unfortunately, I cannot advise of any specific algorithm to address that. It should probably be based on graph analysis combined to geometry (enumerating long paths in a graph and checking the local/global curvature).
As far as I know (after reading thousands related articles), this is nowhere addressed in the literature.
None of the previous answers would really work, the only thing that can work here is a blob filter, filter it so that blobs below a certain size get deleted.
I'm building a photographic film scanner. The electronic hardware is done now I have to finish the mechanical advance mechanism then I'm almost done.
I'm using a line scan sensor so it's one pixel width by 2000 height. The data stream I will be sending to the PC over USB with a FTDI FIFO bridge will be just 1 byte values of the pixels. The scanner will pull through an entire strip of 36 frames so I will end up scanning the entire strip. For the beginning I'm willing to manually split them up in Photoshop but I would like to implement something in my program to do this for me. I'm using C++ in VS. So, basically I need to find a way for the PC to detect the near black strips in between the images on the film, isolate the images and save them as individual files.
Could someone give me some advice for this?
That sounds pretty simple compared to the things you've already implemented; you could
calculate an average pixel value per row, and call the resulting signal s(n) (n being the row number).
set a threshold for s(n), setting everything below that threshold to 0 and everything above to 1
Assuming you don't know the exact pixel height of the black bars and the negatives, search for periodicities in s(n). What I describe in the following is total overkill, but that's how I roll:
use FFTw to calculate a discrete fourier transform of s(n), call it S(f) (f being the frequency, i.e. 1/period).
find argmax(abs(S(f))); that f represents the distance between two black bars: number of rows / f is the bar distance.
S(f) is complex, and thus has an argument; arctan(imag(S(f_max))/real(S(f_max)))*number of rows will give you the position of the bars.
To calculate the width of the bars, you could do the same with the second highest peak of abs(S(f)), but it'll probably be easier to just count the average length of 0 around the calculated center positions of the black bars.
To get the exact width of the image strip, only take the pixels in which the image border may lie: r_left(x) would be the signal representing the few pixels in which the actual image might border to the filmstrip material, x being the coordinate along that row). Now, use a simplistic high pass filter (e.g. f(x):= r_left(x)-r_left(x-1)) to find the sharpest edge in that region (argmax(abs(f(x)))). Use the average of these edges as the border location.
By the way, if you want to write a source block that takes your scanned image as input and outputs a stream of pixel row vectors, using GNU Radio would offer you a nice method of having a flow graph of connected signal processing blocks that does exactly what you want, without you having to care about getting data from A to B.
I forgot to add: Use the resulting coordinates with something like openCV, or any other library capable of reading images and specifying sub-images by coordinates as well as saving to new images.
So I’m trying to find the rotational angle for stripe lines in images like the attached photo.
The only assumption is that the lines are parallel, and their orientation is about 90 degrees approximately more or less [say 5 degrees tolerance].
I have to make sure the stripe lines in the result image will be %100 vertical. The quality of the images varies as well as their histogram/greyscale values. So methods based on non-adaptive thresholding already failed for my cases [I’m not interested in thresholding based methods if I cannot make it adaptive]. Also, there are some random black clusters on top of the stripe lines sometimes.
What I did so far:
1) Of course HoughLines is the first option, but I couldn’t make it work for all my images, I had some partial success though following this great article:
http://felix.abecassis.me/2011/09/opencv-detect-skew-angle/.
The main reason of failure to my understanding was that, I needed to fine tune the parameters for different images. Parameters such as Canny/BW/Morphological edge detection (If needed) | parameters for minLinelength/maxLineGap/etc. For sure there’s a way to hack into this and make it work, but, to me this is a fragile solution!
2) What I’m working on right now, is to divide the image to a top slice and a bottom slice, then find the peaks and valleys of each slice. Then basically find the angle using the width of the image and translation of peaks. I’m currently working on finding which peak of the top slice belongs to which of the bottom slice, since there will be some false positive peaks in my computation due to existence of black/white clusters on top of the strip lines.
Example: Location of peaks for slices:
Top Slice = { 1, 33,67,90,110}
BottomSlice = { 3, 14, 35,63,90,104}
I am actually getting similar vectors when extracting peaks. So as can be seen, the length of vector might vary, any idea how can I get a group like:
{{1,3},{33,35},{67,63},{90,90},{110,104}}
I’m open to any idea about improving any of these algorithms or a completely new approach. If needed, I can upload more images.
If you can get a list of points for a single line, a linear regression will give you a formula for the straight line that best fits the points. A simple trig operation will convert the line formula to an angle.
You can probably use some line thinning operation to turn the stripes into a list of points.
You can run an accumulator of spatial derivatives along different angles. If you want a half-degree precision and a sample of 5 lines, you have a maximum 10*5*1500 = 7.5m iterations. You can safely reduce the sampling rate along the line tenfold, which will give you a sample size of 150 points per sample, reducing the number of iterations to less than a million. Somewhere around that point the operation of straightening the image ought to become the bottleneck.
I have an image and two points,
and I want to read the pixels between these two points,
and resample them into a small 1x40 array.
I'm using EMGU which is a C# wrapper for OpenCV.
thanks,
SW
What you are looking for is Bresenham's line algorithm. It will allow you to get the points in the pixel array that best approximate a straight line. The Wikipedia link also contains psuedo code to get you started.
Emgu CV includes method in the Image class for sampling color along a line called Sample.
Refer to the manual for the definition. Here's the link to Image.Sample in version 2.3.0.
You will still have to re-sample/interpolate the points in array returned from Sample to end up with a 40 element array. Since there are a number of ways to re-sample, I'll suggest you look to other questions for that.
Rotate and crop
I'd first try to do it like this:
calculate rotation matrix with (GetRotationMatrix2D)
warp the image so that this line is horisontal (WarpAffine)
calculate new positions of two of your points (you can use Transform)
get image rectangle of suitable width and 1 px high (GetRectSubPix)
Interpolation here and there may affect the results, but you have to interpolate anyway. You may consider cropping the image before rotation.
Iterate over the 8-connected pixels of the line
Otherwise you may use the line iterator to iterate over the pixels between two points. See documentation for InitLineIterator (Sorry, the link is to the Python version of OpenCV, I've never heard of EMGU). I suppose that in this case you iterate over pixels of a line which was not antialiased. But this should be much faster.
Interpolate manually
Finally, you may convert the image to an array, calculate which elements the line is passing through and subsample and interpolate manually.