I am currently taking my first steps in the field of computer vision and image processing.
One of the tasks I'm working on is finding the center coordinates of (overlapping and occluded) circles.
Here is a sample image:
Here is another sample image showing two overlapping circles:
Further information about the problem:
Always a monochrome, grayscale image
Rather low resolution images
Radii of the circles are unknown
Number of circles in a given image is unknown
Center of circle is to be determined, preferably with sub-pixel accuracy
Radii do not have to be determined
Relative low overhead of the algorithm is of importance; the processing is supposed to be carried out with real-time camera images
For the first sample image, it is relatively easy to calculate the center of the circle by finding the center of mass. Unfortunately, this is not going to work for the second image.
Things I tried are mainly based on the Circle Hough Transform and the Distance Transform.
The Circle Hough Transform seemed relatively computationally expensive due to the fact that I have no information about the radii and the range of possible radii is large. Furthermore, it seems hard to identify the (appropriate) pixels along the edge because of the low resolution of the image.
As for the Distance Transform, I have trouble identifying the centers of the circles and the fact that the image needs to be binarized implies a certain loss of information.
Now I am looking for viable alternatives to the aforementioned algorithms.
Some more sample images (images like the two samples above are extracted from images like the following):
Just thinking aloud to try and get the ball rolling for you... I would be thinking of a Blob, or Connected Component analysis to separate out your blobs.
Then I would start looking at each blob individually. First thing is to see how square the bounding box is for each blob. If it is pretty square AND the centroid of the blob is central within the square, then you have a single circle. If it is not square, or the centroid is not central, you have more than one circle.
Now I am going to start looking at where the white areas touch the edges of the bounding box for some clues as to where the centres are...
Related
I have two closed curve stereo rectified edge images. Is it possible to find the disparity(along x-axis in image coordinates) between the edge images and do a 3D reconstruction since I know the camera matrix. I am using matlab for the process. And I will not be able to do a window based technique as it's a binary image since a window based technique requires texture. The question how will I compute the disparity between the edge images? The images are available in the following links. Left Edge image https://www.dropbox.com/s/g5g22f6b0vge9ct/edge_left.jpg?dl=0 Right Edge Image https://www.dropbox.com/s/wjmu3pugldzo2gw/edge_right.jpg?dl=0
For this type of images, you can easily map each edge pixel from the left image to its counterpart in the right image, and therefore calculate the disparity for those pixels as usual.
The mapping can be done in various ways, depending on how typical these images are. For example, using DTW like approach to match curvatures.
For all other pixels in the image, you just don't have any information.
#Photon: Thanks for the suggestion. I did what you suggested. I matched each edge pixel in the left and right image in a DTW like fashion. But there are some pixels whose y-pixel coordinate value differ by 1 or 2 pixels, albeit they are properly rectified. So I calculated the depth by averaging those differing(up to 2-pixel difference in y-axis) edge pixels using least squares method. But I ended getting this space curve (https://www.dropbox.com/s/xbg2q009fjji0qd/false_edge.jpg?dl=0) when they actually should have been like this (https://www.dropbox.com/s/0ib06yvzf3k9dny/true_edge.jpg?dl=0) which is obtained using RGB images.I couldn't think of any other reason why it would be the case since I compared by traversing along the 408 edge pixels.
I have a multiple plants in a single binary image. How would I identify each leaf in the image assuming that each leaf is approximately elliptical?
example input: http://i.imgur.com/BwhLVmd.png
I was thinking a good place to start would be finding the tip of each leaf and then getting the center of each plant. Then I could fit the curves starting from the tip and then going to the center. I've been looking online and saw something involving a watershed method, but I do not know where to begin with that idea.
You should be aware that these things are tricky to get working robustly - there will always be a failure case.
This said, I think your idea is not bad.
You could start as follows:
Identify the boundary curve of each plant (i.e. pixels with both foreground and background in their neighbourhood).
Compute the centroid of each plant.
Convert each plant boundary to a polar coordinate system, with the centroid as the origin. This amounts to setting up a coordinate system with the distance of each boundary curve point on the Y axis and the angle on the X axis.
In this representation of the boundary curve, try to identify maxima; these are the tips of the leaves. You will probably need to do some smoothing. Use the parts of the curve before and after the maxima the start fitting your ellipses or some other shape.
Generally, a polar coordinate system is always useful for analysing stuff thats roughly circular.
To fit you ellipses, once you have a rough initial position, I would probably try an EM-style approach.
I would do something like this (I is your binary image)
I=bwmorph(bwmorph(I, 'bridge'), 'clean');
SK=bwmorph(I, 'skel', Inf);
endpts = bwmorph(SK,'endpoints');
props=regionprops(I, 'All');
And then connect every segment from the centroids listed in props.centroid to the elements of endpts that should give you your leaves (petals?).
A bit of filtering is probably necessary, bwmorph is your friend. Have fun!
I am looking for a method that looks for shapes in 3D image in matlab. I don't have a real 3D sample image right now; in fact, my 3D image is actually a set of quantized 2D images.
The figure below is what I am trying to accomplish:
Although the example figure above is a 2D image, please understand that I am trying to do this in 3D. The input shape has these "tentacles", and I have to look for irregular shapes among them. The size of the tentacle from one point to another can change around but at "consistent and smooth" pace - that is it can be big at first, then gradually smaller later. But if suddenly, the shape just gets bigger not so gradually, like the red bottom right area in the figure above, then this is one of the volume of interests. Note that these shapes have more tendency to be rounded and spherical, but some of them are completely arbitrary and random.
I've tried the following methods so far:
Erode n times and dilate n times: given that the "tentacles" are always smaller than the volume of interest, this method will work as long as the volume is not too small. And, we need to have a mechanism to deal with thicker portion of the tentacle that becomes false positive somehow.
Hough Transform: although I have been suggested this method earlier (from Segmenting circle-like shapes out of Binary Image), I see that it works for some of the more rounded shape cases, but at the same time, more difficult cases such that of less-rounded, distorted, and/or arbitrary shapes can slip through this method.
Isosurface: because of my input is a set of 2D quantized images, using an isosurface allow me to reconstruct image in 3D and see things clearer. However, I'm not sure what could be done further in this case.
So can anyone suggests some other techniques for segmenting such shape out of these "tentacles"?
Every point on your image has the property that it is either part of the tentacle, or part of the volume of interest. If it is unknown apriori what the expected girth of the tentacle is, then 1 wont work because we won't be able to set n. However, we know that the n that erases the tentacle is smaller than the n that erases the node. You can for each point replace it with an integer representing the distance to the edge. Effectively, this can be done via successive single pixel erosion, and replacing each pixel with the count of the iteration at which it was erased. Lets call this the thickness at the pixel, but my rusty old mind tells me that there was a term of art for this.
Now we want to search for regions that have a higher-than-typical morphological distance from the boundary. I would do this by first skeletonizing the image (http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/images/ref/bwmorph.html) and then searching for local maxima of the thickness along the skeleton. These are points on the skeleton where the thickness is larger than the neighbor points.
Finally I would sort the local maxima by the thickness, a threshold on which should help to separate the volumes of interest from the false positives.
I have a binary image, i want to detect/trace curves in that image. I don't know any thing (coordinates, angle etc). Can any one guide me how should i start? suppose i have this image
I want to separate out curves and other lines. I am only interested in curved lines and their parameters. I want to store information of curves (in array) to use afterward.
It really depends on what you mean by "curve".
If you want to simply identify each discrete collection of pixels as a "curve", you could use a connected-components algorithm. Each component would correspond to a collection of pixels. You could then apply some test to determine linearity or some other feature of the component.
If you're looking for straight lines, circular curves, or any other parametric curve you could use the Hough transform to detect the elements from the image.
The best approach is really going to depend on which curves you're looking for, and what information you need about the curves.
reference links:
Circular Hough Transform Demo
A Brief Description of the Application of the Hough
Transform for Detecting Circles in Computer Images
A method for detection of circular arcs based on the Hough transform
Google goodness
Since you already seem to have a good binary image, it might be easiest to just separate the different connected components of the image and then calculate their parameters.
First, you can do the separation by scanning through the image, and when you encounter a black pixel you can apply a standard flood-fill algorithm to find out all the pixels in your shape. If you have matlab image toolbox, you can find use bwconncomp and bwselect procedures for this. If your shapes are not fully connected, you might apply a morphological closing operation to your image to connect the shapes.
After you have segmented out the different shapes, you can filter out the curves by testing how much they deviate from a line. You can do this simply by picking up the endpoints of the curve, and calculating how far the other points are from the line defined by the endpoints. If this value exceeds some maximum, you have a curve instead of a line.
Another approach would be to measure the ratio of the distance of the endpoints and length of the object. This ratio would be near 1 for lines and larger for curves and wiggly shapes.
If your images have angles, which you wish to separate from curves, you might inspect the directional gradient of your curves. Segment the shape, pick set of equidistant points from it and for each point, calculate the angle to the previous point and to the next point. If the difference of the angle is too high, you do not have a smooth curve, but some angled shape.
Possible difficulties in implementation include thick lines, which you can solve by skeleton transformation. For matlab implementation of skeleton and finding curve endpoints, see matlab image processing toolkit documentation
1) Read a book on Image Analysis
2) Scan for a black pixel, when found look for neighbouring pixels that are also black, store their location then make them white. This gets the points in one object and removes it from the image. Just keep repeating this till there are no remaining black pixels.
If you want to separate the curves from the straight lines try line fitting and then getting the coefficient of correlation. Similar algorithms are available for curves and the correlation tells you the closeness of the point to the idealised shape.
There is also another solution possible with the use of chain codes.
Understanding Freeman chain codes for OCR
The chain code basically assigns a value between 1-8(or 0 to 7) for each pixel saying at which pixel location in a 8-connected neighbourhood does your connected predecessor lie. Thus like mention in Hackworths suggestions one performs connected component labeling and then calculates the chain codes for each component curve. Look at the distribution and the gradient of the chain codes, one can distinguish easily between lines and curves. The problem with the method though is when we have osciallating curves, in which case the gradient is less useful and one depends on the clustering of the chain codes!
Im no computer vision expert, but i think that you could detect lines/curves in binary images relatively easy using some basic edge-detection algorithms (e.g. sobel filter).
I have an image that was rotated to an unknown angle, and I don't have the original image. How I determine the angle of rotation with matlab commands?
I need to rotate the image back with this angle to reach the original image.
As #High Performance Mark mentions in his comment, it is difficult to give an answer when it is unclear how you can recognize that the image is rotated, or what would make you decide that the rotation has properly been corrected.
In other words, you will first have to find a way to determine the rotation angle by analyzing the image with respect to specific features that inform you about a potential rotation. For example, if your image contains a face, you'd do face detection (for which there is plenty of code on the File Exchange and then rotate so that the eyes are up and the mouth down. If your image contains lines that should be vertical and/or horizontal in an un-rotated image, you can apply a Hough-transform to your image and find the most likely angle of rotation using houghpeaks.
Finally, to rotate your image, you can use imrotate.
Without examples or a more detailed description, it's hard to give good advice. But generally, this can be done for some types of images.
For example, suppose the image shows buildings, poles, furniture or something that should have vertical edges. Run an edge detector, then take a Fourier transform. There should be peaks, or some visible pattern in the power spectrum, along the Y axis for an unrotated image. The power spectrum rotates the same way as the image. If you can devise an algorithm to find the spectral features that indicate vertical edges, you can measure its angle w.r.t. the origin (zero frequency). That is the angle of image rotation.
But you will have to distinguish that particular feature from all other image features that show in the power spectrum. Have fun with that - this is the kind of detail that will take most of your creativity and time.