I have an image which I would like to extract the GLCM texture in an area of interest(AOI). But AOI is a non-rectangular shape.
As an image is always stored as a matrix in Matlab, even if the AOI is an irregular polygonal area the neighboring pixels will also have to be used to make it a rectangular region. Since all the pixels outside the area of interest are made equal to zero, does this affect the features extracted from texture analysis.
Is it possible to do any kind of image analysis on non-rectangular regions?
Yes, if the pixels outside the area of interest were being used when computing the gray level cooccurrence matrix, then the result would be incorrect -- that is, would not suit your requirements, as border processing is a matter of choice.
Existing software systems offer this feature:
If you use matlab, according to http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/images/ref/graycomatrix.html, you would need to assign to the pixels of the input image which are outside the AOI the value Nan.
In Mathematica, very conveniently the function ImageCooccurrence has an option named Masking which allows to pass any AOI as a binary mask. From http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/ref/ImageCooccurrence.html:
Related
This question seems a little basic, but I would like to have some inputs about an efficient way of doing this.
Suppose I have the following image :
I also have a binary mask image as follows :
I detect MSER features on this image and plot the corresponding bounding ellipses.
What I need is that I want all those MSER regions removed, whose bounded ellipses overlap with the mask image. My issue is that I have a number of such operations and have to process a large number of images. Thus, what is the most efficient and fast way of doing this, which requirest minimal memory usage ?
It depends how your ellipses are stored, and perhaps on the size of your image. If they are represented as masks then I would be tempted to superimpose all the ellipses first and then do an intersection operation with the rectangle. Then you have a mask which you can apply to the original image.
If your ellipses are stored in a symbolic form - like the output of regionprops - it might be more efficient to test them against the rectangle first and only if they intersect would you convert it into a mask and add it to the overall mask.
I am writing a matlab code that takes in a photo and detects the circular object. For example, the function takes a picture of a peach (circular object) as an input and will return the same image with the peach circled.
Currently, I am using hough transform, utilizing imfindcircles function. However, this function requires me to specify radius range and some sort of sensitivity/threshold value. These values differ for different sizes of image and round objects. So, to get the desired output, I will have to manually change these values for each input image, which is not what I want. I'm going to use this function on 100+ images, so it's impossible for me to do this manually.
My question is is there any way I can make my circular object detection function less manual and possibly completely automatic (does not require me to input any values, just the image)?
Complexity of circle detection
The Hough transform is a voting procedure that requires assumptions be made about the minimum and maximum radii of your circles. Generally speaking using the Randomized Hough Transform for Circles you would pick three-points and then try to form a circle and check if the radius is within the desired range. Running this for a good number of iterations you should find peaks (multiple hits) in your accumulator matrix that represent circles. If you didn't make any assumptions about object size I think it is obvious this method wouldn't work.
Do some routine pre-processing to adjust for contrast and brightness e.g. contrast stretching, histogram equalization. If you might have some noise in the images, then apply bit of gaussian smoothing as well.
Normalizing images this way will reduce inter-image variance and help you with setting thresholds.
the Hough Transform can be used to detect circles, lines, etc.You can refer the demos in Matlab. There are several cases for the application of Hough Transform.
I have an image like this:
What I want to do is to find the outer edge of this cell and the inner edge in the cell between the two parts of different colors.
But this image contains to much detail I think, and is there any way to simplify this image, remove those small edges and find the edges I want?
I have tried the edge function provided by matlab. But it can only find the outer edge and disturbed by those detailed edges.
This is a very challenging work due to the ambiguous boundaries and tiny difference between red and green intensities. If you want to implement the segmentation very precisely and meet some medical requirements, Shai's k-means plus graph cuts may be one of the very few options (EM algorithm may be an alternative). If you have a large database that has many similar images, some machine learning methods might help. Otherwise, I just wrote a very simple code to roughly extract the internal red region for you. The boundary is not that accurate since some of the green regions are also included.
I1=I;
I=rgb2hsv(I);
I=I(:,:,1); % the channel with relatively large margin between green and red
I=I.*(I<0.25);
I=imdilate(I, true(5));
% I=imfill(I,'holes'); depends on what is your definition of the inner boundary
bw=bwconncomp(I);
ar=bw.PixelIdxList;
% find the largest labeled area,
n=0;
for i=1:length(ar)
if length(ar{i})>n
n=length(ar{i});
num=i;
end
end
bw1=bwlabel(I);
bwfinal(:,:,1)=(bw1==num).*double(I1(:,:,1));
bwfinal(:,:,2)=(bw1==num).*double(I1(:,:,2));
bwfinal(:,:,3)=(bw1==num).*double(I1(:,:,3));
bwfinal=uint8(bwfinal);
imshow(bwfinal)
It seems to me you have three dominant colors in the image:
1. blue-ish background (but also present inside cell as "noise")
2. grenn-ish one part of cell
3. red-ish - second part of cell
If these three colors are distinct enough, you may try and segment the image using k-means and Graph cuts.
First stage - use k-means to associate each pixels with one of three dominant colors. Apply k-means to the colors of the image (each pixel is a 3-vector in your chosen color space). Run k-means with k=3, keep for each pixel its distance to centroids.
Second stage - separate cell from background. Do a binary segmentation using graph-cut. The data cost for each pixel is either the distance to the background color (if pixel is labeled "background"), or the minimal distance to the other two colors (if pixel is labeled "foreground"). Use image contrast to set the pair-wise weights for the smoothness term.
Third stage - separate the two parts of the cell. Again do a binary segmentation using graph-cut but this time work only on pixels marked as "cell" in the previous stage. The data term for pixels that the k-means assigned to background but are labeled as cell should be zero for all labels (these are the "noise" pixels inside the cell).
You may find my matlab wrapper for graph-cuts useful for this task.
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.
the output of some processing consists of a binary map with several connected areas.
The objective is, for each area, to compute and draw on the image a line crossing the area on its longest axis, but not extending further. It is very important that the line lies just inside the area, therefore ellipse fitting is not very good.
Any hint on how to do achieve this result in an efficient way?
If you have the image processing toolbox you can use regionprops which will give you several standard measures of any binary connected region. This includes
You can also get the tightest rectangular bounding box, centroid, perimeter, orientation. These will all help you in ellipse fitting.
Depending on how you would like to draw your lines, the regionprops function also returns the length for major and minor axes in 2-D connected regions and does it on a per-connected-region basis, giving you a vector of axis lengths. If you specify 4 neighbor connected you are fairly sure that the length will be exclusively within the connected region. But this is not guaranteed since `regionprops' calculates major axis length of an ellipse that has the same normalized second central moment as the connected region.
My first inclination would be to treat the pixels as 2D points and use principal components analysis. PCA will give you the major axis of each region (princomp if you have the stat toolbox).
Regarding making line segments and not lines, not knowing anything about the shape of these regions, an efficient method doesn't occur to me. Assuming the region could have any arbitrary shape, you could just trace along each line until you reach the edge of the region. Then repeat in the other direction.
I assumed you already have the binary image divided into regions. If this isn't true you could use bwlabel (if the regions aren't touching) or k-means (if they are) first.