Which method is commonly used to evaluate the remaining 'boundary' pixels after an initial segmentation (based on thresholds)?
I thought about classification based on a standard deviation from the threshold values but I don't know if that is common practice in image analysis. This would be a region growing method but based on the answer on this question ( http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/53351-how-can-i-segment-a-color-image-with-region-growing ) it is not sensible to use the region growing algorithm. Someone suggested imdilate. This method seems arbitrary, useful when enhancing images for aesthetic purpose or to enhance the visibility. For my problem the assigning of the pixels has to be correct because I have to do measurements on these extracted objects/features and a few pixels make a huge difference.
What I was looking for :
To collect my boundary pixels of the BW image from the first segmentation (which I found : http://nl.mathworks.com/help/images/ref/bwboundaries.html)
A decision rule (nearest neighbor ?) to classify those boundary pixels. It would be helpful if there were multiple methods to do this, because it makes a relative accuracy check of the classification possible.
I would really appreciate the input/advice from someone with more experience in this area to point me to the right direction (functions, tutorials etc…)
Thank you !
What will work for you depends very much on the images you have. This is no one-size-fits-all algorithm.
First, you need to answer the question: Given a pixel close to a segmented feature, what would make you believe that this pixel belongs to the feature? Also: what is "close"?
The answer to the second question determines your search area. Here, imdilate is useful to identify candidate pixels (i.e. you dilate your feature, subtract the feature, and you are left with a ring of candidate pixels around each feature). If you test on all pixels, the risk is not so much that it could take forever, but that for some images, your region growing mechanism expands to the entire image.
The answer to the first question determines what algorithm you'll use. Do you look for a gradient, i.e. "if pixel p is closer in intensity to the adjacent feature than to most of its neighbors, then I take it"? Do you look for texture? Do you look for a local threshold (hysteresis thresholding)? The answer, again, depends very much on the images you are segmenting. Make sure you test on a large set of images, because what may look good on one image may totally fail on a different one.
Related
Given are two monochromatic images of same size. Both are prealigned/anchored to one common point. Some points of the original image did move to a new position in the new image, but not in a linear fashion.
Below you see a picture of an overlay of the original (red) and transformed image (green). What I am looking for now is a measure of "how much did the "individual" points shift".
At first I thought of a simple average correlation of the whole matrix or some kind of phase correlation, but I was wondering whether there is a better way of doing so.
I already found that link, but it didn't help that much. Currently I implement this in Matlab, but this shouldn't be the point I guess.
Update For clarity: I have hundreds of these image pairs and I want to compare each pair how similar they are. It doesn't have to be the most fancy algorithm, rather easy to implement and yielding in a good estimate on similarity.
An unorthodox approach uses RASL to align an image pair. A python implementation is here: https://github.com/welch/rasl and it also
provides a link to the RASL authors' original MATLAB implementation.
You can give RASL a pair of related images, and it will solve for the
transformation (scaling, rotation, translation, you choose) that best
overlays the pixels in the images. A transformation parameter vector
is found for each image, and the difference in parameters tells how "far apart" they are (in terms of transform parameters)
This is not the intended use of
RASL, which is designed to align large collections of related images while being indifferent to changes in alignment and illumination. But I just tried it out on a pair of jittered images and it worked quickly and well.
I may add a shell command that explicitly does this (I'm the author of the python implementation) if I receive encouragement :) (today, you'd need to write a few lines of python to load your images and return the resulting alignment difference).
You can try using Optical Flow. http://www.mathworks.com/discovery/optical-flow.html .
It is usually used to measure the movement of objects from frame T to frame T+1, but you can also use it in your case. You would get a map that tells you the "offset" each point in Image1 moved to Image2.
Then, if you want a metric that gives you a "distance" between the images, you can perhaps average the pixel values or something similar.
I'm working on MATLAB on some regions inside an image. I'm at a point in which I would like to be able to separate regions which exhibit some kind of regularity (e.g., being circle-ish or square-ish) from regions which does not resemble any known figure and which for my application are mere noise. I'll illustrate this using a descriptive MS Paint image:
Is there any tool that, most of the times (or even less, I know this can't be 100/100) will recognize the red thing as being different?
I'll deal with many shapes in a single image, so I don't mind if I carry on some red monsters along the way, as long as the majority of them is kicked out. Of course I know the indices of these regions, so I can manipulate them in MATLAB.
Many algorithms come to mind, e.g., getting the boundary and checking for its regularity/the number of times it changes curvature/..., checking for variations in vertical length through different columns (nearly 0 for the linear feature, really high for the red stuff), ...
However I was hoping in some help from a tool out there. It doesn't matter if this tool won't cover all cases (for example, will kick out circles), I've been very broad to get the maximum number of inputs from you guys - any tool will be inspiring and helpful (and, however, we can't expect a perfect answer for the deeper question - recognizing regular shapes - which seems more like a AI field of research). I also think that, while being broad, this is totally non-subjective so should fit in SO. Thank you.
Side note 1: I'll deal mostly with elongated, extended features like the top-right one, so circles are not that relevant.
Side note 2: To be 100% clear, I would need something (be it an already existant tool, or some ideas pointed out by you) that acts on the indices of the shapes, in terms of rows-columns into the original image, or on the boundary of the shape itself.
Side note 3: Apart from tools/suggestions/ideas, you are welcomed to write down some lines of code ;) I'm getting the regions as connected components from bwconncomp.
I had to solve a similar problem recently that involved counting the number of indentations on blobs within in an image (basically, the connected components returned by bwconncomp). The method I used was to look at curvature changes along the boundary calculated via the FFT. In your case, the red blobs would have a large number of curvature variations, whereas the black regions would not. It's a pretty easy calculation and relatively fast. The code is on github here:
https://github.com/mjsottile/blobdents
The file of interest is src/countindents.m. A short description of the approach is here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.07692
I went for the easier road as suggested by #Mikhail in comments.
I found out regionprops has a really helpful tool called Solidity. Quoting docs,
Returns a scalar specifying the proportion of the pixels in the convex hull that are also in the region. Computed as Area/ConvexArea.
Convex hull is defined as the smallest convex polygon that can contain the region. So Solidity goes up to 1 if the shape is kind of regular and has no convexity changes; down to 0 for my red shape, which leaves space between itself and the convex polygon.
Of course it never reaches 0, lowest value should belong to a kind of +-shaped sign.
I have a question regarding computer vision; seems to be a general question but anyways, just wondering if you might have a clue. I was wondering if there is an efficient way to distinguish texture images (or photos with repetitive patterns) between whatnot, say realistic photos? The patterns could have exact repetitions, or just have major similarity. Actually I'm trying to see given an image if, it is possible to detect it is a texture or a pattern-based image, and that in real-time maybe?
For instance these three are considered textures in our context:
http://www.bigchrisart.com/sites/default/files/video/TR_Texture_RockWall.jpg
http://www.colourbox.com/preview/4440275-144135-seamless-geometric-op-art-texture.jpg
Thank you!
I cannot open your first image. I implemented the Fourier transform on your second one, and you can see frequency responses at specific points:
You can further process the image by extract the local maximum of the magnitude, and they share the same distance to the center (zero frequency). This may be considered as repetitive patterns.
Regarding the case that patterns share major similarity instead of repetitive feature, it is hard to tell whether the frequency magnitude still has such evident response. It depends on how the pattern looks like.
Another possible approach is the auto-correlation on your image.
I have a image with noise. i want to remove all background variation from an image and want a plain image .My image is a retinal image and i want only the blood vessel and the retinal ring to remain how do i do it? 1 image is my original image and 2 image is how i want it to be.
this is my convoluted image with noise
There are multiple approaches for blood vessel extraction in retina images.
You can find a thorough overview of different approaches in Review of Blood Vessel Extraction Techniques and Algorithms. It covers prominent works of many approache.
As Martin mentioned, we have the Hessian-based Multiscale Vessel Enhancement Filtering by Frangi et al. which has been shown to work well for many vessel-like structures both in 2D and 3D. There is a Matlab implementation, FrangiFilter2D, that works on 2D vessel images. The overview fails to mention Frangi but cover other works that use Hessian-based methods. I would still recommend trying Frangi's vesselness approach since it is both powerful and simple.
Aside from the Hesisan-based methods, I would recommend looking into morphology-based methods since Matlab provides a good base for morphological operations. One such method is presented in An Automatic Hybrid Method for Retinal Blood Vessel Extraction. It uses a morphological approach with openings/closings together with the top-hat transform. It then complements the morphological approach with fuzzy clustering and some post processing. I haven't tried to reproduce their method, but the results look solid and the paper is freely available online.
This is not an easy task.
Detecting boundary of blood vessals - try edge( I, 'canny' ) and play with the threshold parameters to see what you can get.
A more advanced option is to use this method for detecting faint curves in noisy images.
Once you have reasonably good edges of the blood vessals you can do the segmentation using watershed / NCuts or boundary-sensitive version of meanshift.
Some pointers:
- the blood vessals seems to have relatively the same thickness, much like text strokes. Would you consider using Stroke Width Transform (SWT) to identify them? A mex implementation of SWT can be found here.
- If you have reasonably good boundaries, you can consider this approach for segmentation.
Good luck.
I think you'll be more served using a filter based on tubes. There is a filter available which is based on the work done by a man called Frangi, and the filter is often dubbed the Frangi filter. This can help you with identifying the vasculature in the retina. The filter is already written for Matlab and a public version is available here. If you would like to read about the underlying research search for: 'Multiscale vessel enhancement', by Frangi (1998). Another group who's done work in the same field are Sato et.al.
Sorry for the lack of a link in the last one, I could only find payed sites for looking at the research paper on this computer.
Hope this helps
Here is what I will do. Basically traditional image arithmetic to extract background and them subtract it from input image. This will give you the desired result without background. Below are the steps:
Use a median filter with large kernel as the first step. This will estimate the background.
Divide the input image with the output of step 1 [You may have to shift the denominator a little (+1) ] to avoid divide by 0.
Do the quantization to 8 or n bit integer based on what bit the original image is.
The output of step 3 above is the background. Subtract it from original image, to get the desired result. This clips all the negative values as well.
I am going through feature detection algorithms and a lot of things seems to be unclear. The original paper is quite complicated to understand for beginners in image processing. Shall be glad if these are answered
What are the features which are being detected by SURF and SIFT?
Is it necessary that these have to be computed on gray scale images?
What does the term "descriptor" mean in simple words.
Generally,how many features are selected/extracted?Is there a criteria for that?
What does the size of Hessian matrix determine?
What is the size of the features being detected?It is said that the size of a feature is the size of the blob.So, if size of image is M*N so will there be M*N n umber of features?
These questions may seem too trivial, but please help..
I will try to give an intuitive answer to some of your questions, I don't know answers to all.
(You didn't specify which paper you are reading)
What are the features and how many features are being detected by SURF
and SIFT?
Normally features are any part in an image around which you selected a small block. You move that block by a small distance in all directions. If you find considerable variations between the one you selected and its surroundings, it is considered as a feature. Suppose you moved your camera a little bit to take the image, still you will detect this feature. That is their importance. Normally best example of such a feature is corners in the image. Even edges are not so good features. When you move your block along the edge lines, you don't find any variation, right?
Check this image to understand what I said , only at the corner you get considerable variation while moving the patches, in other two cases you won't get much.
Image link : http://www.mathworks.in/help/images/analyzing-images.html
A very good explanation is given here : http://aishack.in/tutorials/features-what-are-they/
This the basic idea and the algorithms you mentioned make this more robust to several variations and solve many issues. (You can refer their papers for more details)
Is it necessary that these have to be computed on gray scale images?
I think so. Anyway OpenCV works on grayscale images
What does the term "descriptor" mean in simple words?
Suppose you found features in one image, say image of a building. Now you took another image of same building but from a slightly different direction. You found features in the second image also. But how can you match these features. Say feature 1 in image 1 match to which feature in image 2 ? (As a human, you can do easily, right ? This corner of building in first image corresponds to this corner in second image, so and so. Very easy).
Feature is just giving you pixel location. You need more information about that point to match it with others. So you have to describe the feature. And this description is called "descriptors". To describe this features, algorithms are there and you can see it SIFT paper.
Check this link also : http://aishack.in/tutorials/sift-scale-invariant-feature-transform-introduction/
Generally,how many features are selected/extracted?Is there a criteria
for that?
During processing you can see applying different thresholds, removing weak keypoints etc. It is all part of plan. You need to understand algorithm to understand these things. Yes, you can specify these threshold and other parameters (in OpenCV) or you can leave it as default. If you check for SIFT in OpenCV docs, you can see function parameters to specify number of features, number of octave layers, edge threshold etc.
What does the size of Hessian matrix determine?
That I don't know exactly, just it is a threshold for keypoint detector. Check OpenCV docs : http://docs.opencv.org/modules/nonfree/doc/feature_detection.html#double%20hessianThreshold