I run the mosse code and get the tracking filter then IDFT and display as image ：
filter image whose center have an black point is on the top of car.
but paper display the filter is：
this is image display by paper author.
It is not unusual to encounter spectrum values that range from 0 to max valuue or higher. While processing numbers such as these presents no problems for a computer, image display systems generally will not be able to reproduce faithfully such a wide range of intensity values. The net effect is that a significant degree of intensity detail can be lost in the display of a typical Fourier spectrum.
Related
need some help here on image processing. I'm using Matlab and try to segment the following figure based on the two major peaks (in yellow). The color yellow means higher value and blue means low value (on z-axis, or image color from 0 to 1 for your convenience). The ideal cut is roughly the line from point (1,75) to (120,105). But I want a systematic way to derive this rather than by observation.
My intuition was to first identify the two peaks (based on this), and then classify each point/pixel on this figure to the two peaks (the metric here is to compute the shortest Euclidean distance to the edge of the two peaks).
And I end up with the following fig.
As you can see, the cut is pretty much a straight line, which I'm not quite satisfied. Maybe I can use the orientation of the peak circle and somehow tilt the line.. but I'm not sure how to do so? Any clues? Thanks.
This is an Image segmentation problem.
you can use GMM Gaussian of Mixture Model to model the image.
in your case the number of components will be 2.
after you model the image by using this mixture, you can find the probability of each pixel P(pixel x belong to the first component or the second component)
check
http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/newsreader/view_thread/272162
http://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/cluster-data-from-mixture-of-gaussian-distributions.html
I have a series of medical images from which I am attempting to segment out and analyze the ECG tracings in Matlab (the green, spiking line in the image below):
I have so far been successful in doing this on a small set of images using color thresholding and region properties. My problem is that almost all aspects of this feature of interest can change depending on the manufacturer of the machine used to produce the images and the behavior of the user operating it (over which I have 0 control).
Potentially differing attributes include line position in the image (which can change to be almost anywhere in the image), amplitude, frequency, and even color (which can be changed to match the color of the large white surface under the line in the above image). This makes it extremely difficult to create a robust segmentation solution for all images relying only on "simple" methods (color segmentation, region properties, edge detection etc).
Would it be straight forward to train a classifier to identify the general shape of this line and segment it out? Alternatively, is there another way to search and segment an image using prior shape information?
If you are currently applying an arbitrary threshold, you can look at various technique for dynamic thresholding (here a technique that applies the concept on edge detection).
What you could also try is to threshold on a different representation of the image, such as HSL and HSV (as I am assuming you are thresholding on the RGB values)
You may use a classifier and active contour model to segment the desired region. An example can be found here: http://pratondo.staff.telkomuniversity.ac.id/2016/01/14/robust-edge-stop-functions-for-edge-based-active-contour-models-in-medical-image-segmentation/
I am currently implementing a detection and tracking system by tracking heads. I was trying to figure out some similarity score between two detected images so that I can analyse if the detections are of the same person or not (in different frames). I tried to change the RGB images (detections) into HSV and concatenate the Hue and Saturation values into one single vector for each image. Then I found the difference between the vectors of the separate detections by using the summation of the absolute difference.
However, when I tried it, a detection of a bag had a better similarity score than that of the same head. Can someone guide me with what maybe is wrong or else any better comparison technique?
Currently I hope to use scale space representation to filter one image. Features in one image can be filtered using an Gaussian smooth filter with one optimal sigma. It means different features in one image can be expressed best in different scale under scale space representation.
For example, I have one image with one tree in it. In the scale space representation, three sigma values are used and they are represented as sigma0, sigma1 and sigma2. The ground is best expressed in the smoothed image with sigma0 because it contains textures mainly. The branches are best expressed in the smoother image with sigma1 and the trunk is with the smoother image with sigma2. If I hope to filter the image, I hope that the filtered pixels for the group is from the smoothed image with sigma0.
The filtered pixels for the branches are from the smoothed image with sigma1. The filtered pixels for the trunk are from the smoothed image with sigma2.
It requires that I need to determine in which smoothed image one pixel is expressed best. Is this idea plausible?
I am trying to use differece-of-Gaussian of two successive smoothed images to perform the above task. Is there any other way to combine the three smoothed image?
I use Matlab to implement the idea. The values of the three sigmas is 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0. The corresponding size of Gaussian kernel is 3, 5 and 7. I use the function fspecial to generate the kernel. Are the parameter reasonable? Please share your experience with the scale space representation to help me. You can provide some links to useful papers.
your idea is very much plausible! You are just one step away from it. I did something very similar once and it looked like this:
After smoothing your images and extracting the edges for each smoothing step (I used a weighted [to compensate for maxima supression after Gauss filtering] Sobel filter for this since DOG was not quite stable for my aplication), you can proyect (and normalize) your whole stack of edge images into a single image ("cummulative edges") which will contain the characteristic edges. You can then compare the cummulative edges image (using cross-correlation or whatever you wish) with every single image in your edge stack, the biggest value of this comparation is then the smooth-scale in which the pixel is expressed the best.
Hope that makes sense for you after reading it a couple of times.
Also don't be afraid of using much bigger kernel sizes, while it all depends on your application, I ended up using things of 51 and bigger!!! (was working with 40MP images though...)
T. Lindeberg has literally dozens of papers related to this problem. I found this one the most useful, but since you are already in the right track, I don't think reading the 50 pages will make you that much smarter. The most important part of it is maybe this one:
Principle for scale selection:
In the absence of other evidence, assume that a scale level, at which some
(possibly non-linear) combination of normalized derivatives assumes a
local maximum over scales, can be treated as reflecting a characteristic
length of a corresponding structure in the data.
Here with i have attached two consecutive frames captured by a cmos camera with IR Filter.The object checker board was stationary at the time of capturing images.But the difference between two images are nearly 31000 pixels.This could be affect my result.can u tell me What kind of noise is this?How can i remove it.please suggest me any algorithms or any function possible to remove those noises.
Thank you.Sorry for my poor English.
Image1 : [1]: http://i45.tinypic.com/2wptqxl.jpg
Image2: [2]: http://i45.tinypic.com/v8knjn.jpg
That noise appears to result from camera sensor (Bayer to RGB conversion). There's the checkerboard pattern still left.
Also lossy jpg contributes a lot to the process. You should first have an access to raw images.
From those particular images I'd first try to use edge detection filters (Sobel Horizontal and Vertical) to make a mask that selects between some median/local histogram equalization for the flat areas and to apply some checker board reducing filter to the edges. The point is that probably no single filter is able to do good for both jpeg ringing artifacts and to the jagged edges. Then the real question is: what other kind of images should be processed?
From the comments: if corner points are to be made exact, then the solution more likely is to search for features (corner points with subpixel resolution) and make a mapping from one set of points to the other images set of corners, and search for the best affine transformation matrix that converts these sets to each other. With this matrix one can then perform resampling of the other image.
One can fortunately estimate motion vectors with subpixel resolution without brute force searching all possible subpixel locations: when calculating a matched filter, one gets local maximums for potential candidates of exact matches. But this is not all there is. One can try to calculate a more precise approximation of the peak location by studying the matched filter outputs in the nearby pixels. For exact match the output should be symmetric. Otherwise the 'energies' of the matched filter are biased towards the second best location. (A 2nd degree polynomial fit + finding maximum can work.)
Looking closely at these images, I must agree with #Aki Suihkonen.
In my view, the main noise comes from the jpeg compression, that causes sharp edges to "ring". I'd try a "de-speckle" type of filter on the images, and see if this makes a difference. Some info that can help you implement this can be found in this link.
In a more quick and dirty fashion, you apply one of the many standard tools, for example, given the images are a and b:
(i) just smooth the image with a Gaussian filter, this can reduce noise differences between the images by an order of magnitude. For example:
h=fspecial('gaussian',15,2);
a=conv2(a,h,'same');
b=conv2(b,h,'same');
(ii) Reduce Noise By Adaptive Filtering
a = wiener2(a,[5 5]);
b = wiener2(b,[5 5]);
(iii) Adjust ntensity Values Using Histogram Equalization
a = histeq(a);
b = histeq(b);
(iv) Adjust Intensity Values to a Specified Range
a = imadjust(a,[0 0.2],[0.5 1]);
b = imadjust(b,[0 0.2],[0.5 1]);
If your images are supposed to be black and white but you have captured them in gray scale there could be difference due to noise.
You can convert the images to black and white by defining a threshold, any pixel with a value less than that threshold should be assigned 0 and anything larger than that threshold should be assigned 1, or whatever your gray scale range is (maybe 255).
Assume your image is I, to make it black and white assuming your gray scale image level is from 0 to 255, assume you choose a threshold of 100:
ind = find(I < 100);
I(ind) = 0;
ind = find(I >= 100);
I(ind) = 255;
Now you have a black and white image, do the same thing for the other image and you should get very small difference if the camera and the subject have note moved.