How does image resize[Adding and Reducing size of image] works and what happens to the pixels and RGB ?
explain briefly
An RGB image has three channels: red, green, and blue. RGB channels roughly follow the color receptors in the human eye, and are used in computer displays and image scanners.
If the RGB image is 24-bit (the industry standard as of 2005), each channel has 8 bits, for red, green, and blue—in other words, the image is composed of three images (one for each channel), where each image can store discrete pixels with conventional brightness intensities between 0 and 255. If the RGB image is 48-bit (very high color-depth), each channel is made of 16-bit images.
Image interpolation occurs when you resize or distort your image from one pixel grid to another. Image resizing is necessary when you need to increase or decrease the total number of pixels, whereas remapping can occur when you are correcting for lens distortion or rotating an image. Zooming refers to increase the quantity of pixels, so that when you zoom an image, you will see more detail.
So the number of pixels will be reduced which means it will have a less rgb pixels.
Related
I'm wirtting a program that changes all the image pixels to grayscale except for the red ones. At first, i thought it would be easier, but I'm having trouble trying to find the best way to determine if a pixel is red or not.
The first method I tried was a formula: Green < Red/2 && Blue < Red/1.5
results:
michael jordan
goldhill
Michael Jordan's image shows some not red pixels that pass the formula, like #7F3222 and #B15432. So i tried a different method, hue >= 345 || hue <= 9, trying to limit only the red part of the color wheel.
results:
michael jordan 2
goldhill 2
Michael Jordan's image now has less not red pixels and goldhill's image has more red pixels than before but still not what I want.
My methods are incorrect or just some adjustments are missing? if they're incorrect, how can I solve this problem?
Your question "How to identify 'real' red pixels", begs the question "what a red pixel actually is, especially if it has to be 'real'".
The RGB (red, green, blue) color model is not well suited to answer that question, therefore you should use the HSV (hue, saturation, value) model.
Hue defines the color in degrees (0 - 360 degrees)
Saturation defines the intensity of the color (0 - 100 %)
Value or Brightness defines the luminosity (0 - 100 %)
Steps:
convert RGB to HSV
if the H value is not red (+/- 30 degrees, you'll have to define a threshold range of what you consider to be red, 'real' red would be 0 degrees)
set S to 0 (zero), by doing so we remove the saturation of the color, which results in a gray shade
leave the brightness (V) as it is (or play around with it and see how it effects the results)
convert HSV to RGB
Convert from RGB to HSV and vice versa:
RGB to HSV
HSV to RGB
More info on HSV:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSL_and_HSV
"All cats are gray in the dark"
Implement a dynamic color range. Adjust the 'red' range based on the brightness and/or saturation of the current pixel. Put a weight scale (on how much they affect the range in %) on the saturation and brightness values to determine your range ... play around to achieve the best results.
You used RGB, and HSV method, which it is good, and both are ok.
The problem is about defining red. Hue (or R) is not enough: it contains many other colours (in the broader sense): browns are dark/unsaturated reds (or oranges). Pink is also a tint of red (so red + white, so unsaturated).
So in your first method, I would add a condition: R > 127 (you must check yourself a good threshold). And possibly change the other conditions with a higher ratio of R to G and B and possibly adding also the ration R to (G+B). The first new added condition is about reds (and not "dark reds/browns), and brightness. Your two conditions are about "hue" (hue is defined by the top two values), and the last condition I wrote is about saturation.
You can do in a similar way for HSV: filter H (as you did), but you must filter also V (you want just bright reds), and also an high saturation, so you must filter all channels.
You should test yourself the saturation levels. The problem is that eyes adapt quickly to colours, so some images with a lot of redish colours are seen normally (less redish) by humans, but more red by above calculation. Etc. (so usually for such works there is some sliders to modify, e.v. you can try to automatize, but you need to find overall hue and brightness of image, and possibly complex methods, see CIECAM).
In my 2D map application, I have 16-bit heightmap textures containing altitudes in meters associated to a point on the map.
When I draw these textures on the screen, I would like to display an analysis such that the pixel referring to the highest altitude on the screen is white, the pixel referring to the lowest altitude in the screen is black and the values in-between are interpolated between those two.
I'm using an older OpenGL version and thus do not have access to modern pipeline functionality like GLSL or PBO (Which somehow can make getting color buffer contents to CPU side much more efficient than glReadPixels, as I've heard).
I have access to ATI_fragment_shader extension which makes possible to use a basic fragment shader to merge R and G channels in these textures and get a single float grayscale luminance value.
Then I would've been able to re-color these pixels again inside shader (Map them to 0-1 range) based on maximum and minimum pixel luminance values but I don't know what they are.
My question is, between the pixels currently on the screen, how do I find the pixels with maximum and minimum luminance values? Or as an alternative, how do I find these values inside a texture? (Because I could make a glCopyTexImage2D call after drawing the texture with grayscale luminance values on the screen and retrieve the data as a texture).
Stuff I've tried or read about so far:
-If I could somehow get current pixel RGB values in the color buffer to CPU side, I could find what I need manually and then use them. However, reading color buffer contents with glReadPixels is unacceptably slow. It's no use even if I set it up so that it completes one read operation over multiple frames.
-Downsampling the texture to 1x1 size until the last standing pixel is either minimum or maximum value and then using this 1x1 texture inside shader. I have no idea how to achieve this without GLSL and texel fetching support since I would have to look up the pixel which is to the right, up and up-right of the current one and find a min/max value between them.
I am using FreeType to render some texts.
The surface where I want to draw the text is a bitmap image with format ARGB, pre-multiplied alpha.
The needed color of the text is also ARGB.
The rendered FT_Bitmap has format FT_PIXEL_MODE_LCD - it is as the text is rendered with white color on black background, with sub-pixel antialiasing.
So, for every pixel I have 3 numbers:
Da, Dr, Dg, Db - destination pixel ARGB (the background image).
Fr, Fg, Fb - FreeType rendered pixel (FT_Bitmap rendered with FT_RENDER_MODE_LCD)
Ca, Cr, Cg, Cb - The color of the text I want to use.
So, the question: How to properly combine these 3 numbers in order to get the result bitmap pixel.
The theoretical answers are OK and even better than code samples.
Interpet the FreeType data not as actual RGB colors (these 'raw' values are to draw text in black) but as intensities of the destination text color.
So the full intensity of each F color component is F*C/255. However, since your C also includes an alpha component, the intensity is scaled by it:
s' = F*C*A/(255 * 255)
assuming, of course, that F, C, and A are inside the usual range of 0..255. A is a fraction A/255, and the second division is to bring F*C back into the target range. s' is now the derived source color.
On to plotting it. Per color component, the new color gets add to D, and D in turn gets dimished by the source's alpha 255-A (scaled).
That leads to the full sum
D' = D*(255-A)/255 + F*C*A/(255 * 255)
equal to (moving one value to the right)
D' = (D*(255-A) + F*C*A/255)/255
for each separate channel r,g,b of D, F, C and A. The last one, alpha, also needs a separate calculation for each channel because your FreeType output data returns this format.
If the calculation is too slow, you could compare the visual result with not-LCD-optimized grayscale output from FreeType. I suspect that especially on 'busy' (not entirely monochrome) backgrounds the extra calculations are simply not worth it.
The numerical advantage of a pure grayscale input is that you only have to calculate A and 1-A once for each triplet of RGB colors.
The "background" also has an alpha channel but to draw text "on" it you can regard this as 'unused'. Drawing a transparent item onto another transparent item does not, in general, change its intrinsic transparency.
After some discovery, I found the right answer. It is disappointing.
It is impossible to draw subpixel rendered graphics (including fonts) on a transparent image with RGBA format.
In order to properly render such graphics, a format that supports separate alpha channels for every color is mandatory.
For example 48 bit per pixes: RrGgBg where r, g and b are the alpha channels for the red, green and blue collor channels respectively.
Similar to calibrating a single camera 2D image with a chessboard, I wish to determine the width/height of the chessboard (or of a single square) in pixels.
I have a camera aimed vertically at the ground, ensured to be perfectly level with the surface below. I am using the camera to determine the translation between consequtive frames (successfully achieved using fourier phase correlation), at the moment my result returns the translation in pixels, however I would like to use techniques similar to calibration, where I move the camera over the chessboard which is flat on the ground, to automatically determine the size of the chessboard in pixels, relative to my image height and width.
Knowing the size of the chessboard in millimetres, I can then convert a pixel unit to a real-world-unit in millimetres, ie, 1 pixel will represent a distance proportional to the height of the camera above the ground. This will allow me to convert a translation in pixels to a translation in millimetres, recalibrating every time I change the height of the camera.
What would be the recommended way of achieving this? Surely it must be simpler than single camera 2D calibration.
OpenCV can give you the position of the chessboard's corners with cv::findChessboardCorners().
I'm not sure if the perspective distortion will affect your calculations, but if the chessboard is perfectly aligned beneath the camera, it should work.
This is just an idea so don't hit me.. but maybe using the natural contrast of the chessboard?
"At some point it will switch from bright to dark pixels and that should happen (can't remember number of columns on chessboard) times." should be a doable algorithm.
I have a two bmp files of the same scene and I would like determine if one is more bright than the other.
Similarly I have a set of bmps with different contrasts and another set of bmps with different saturation.
How do I compare these images for brightness,contrast and saturation ? These test images are saved by a tool provided by the sensor manufacturer.
I am using gcc 4.5.
To compare the brightness of two images you need to compare the grey value of the pixels (yes, one by one). In the RGB colour space the brightness (grey value) is the mean of R,G and B, so you have brightness = (R+G+B) / 3
Comparing the contrast and especially the saturation will prove to be not that easy, for a start you could have a look at HSL and HSV but in general I'd suggest to get a good book on the image processing topic.
The answer of (R+G+B)/3 is really not even a good approximation of brightness (at least from what we know today)!
[BRIGHTNESS]
What you really SHOULD do is convert to another color scale and compare the brightness using that channel of a color scale that incorporates brightness into it. Look here!!!
Formula to determine brightness of RGB color
there are a great coupld of answers here that talk about conversion or RGB into luminance, etc...
[CONTRAST]
Contrast is a function of the spread of the pixel values throughout the full range of possible pixel values. One understands the contrast by putting together a histogram of all the pixels (where the x axis represents the a pixel value, and the y axis represents how many pixels are of that value), and analyzing the histogram to understand if there is good distribution throught the entire range, or not. Comparing contrast can be done many ways, but potentially a good starting point, would be to find the pixel-value center point (average of the histogram data) of each image, and potentially some histogram width parameter (where lets say the width is about the center point and is large enough to incorporate 90% of all pixels), and compare the center and width parameters of both images. This is ONLY a starting point.
[SATURATION]
To compare saturation, one might convert the image to the HSL colour space. The S in HSL stands for Saturation. Comparing saturation within this colour space becomes exactly like comparing brightness as outlined above!!!