"stitching" two pictures to find best translation and rotation python - python

I have two images from a video, frameA and frameB. Assuming the video is panning, slowly, one can imagine that frameA and frameB have significant overlap. We can then create a panorama from the video footage.
I have tried using: opencv2.stitcher, SURF/ORB detectors with BF matching, and a few vanilla approaches. None of them are producing the results that I need [for some reason]. The main problem I am identifying is that SURF/ORB is identify too "small" a region of interest and matching incorrectly.
Example: I am in a desert with 1 single cactus in my view. I am panning across it.
The SURF/ORB is detecting regions of interest such as the EDGES of my cactus with sky/land and unable to match (not sure why) it in the next frame. The things it does detect, it does not match up well and when you use homography, it matches say the middle of the cactus with the top part of the cactus in the next frame... and it gets warped.
Is there a way to do the following?
Enforce only rotation and translation? between 2 frames -- note that there is "new" information in subsequent frames, so it can never 100% overlap.
Find best rotation and translation, with the base assumption that there is a best match? (i am very very slowly panning, and guarantee high overlap).
Ignore minor fluctuations. If my feature detectors were "large" enough, it would say, "cactus in frame 1" matches "catctus in frame 2", translate by X,Y and maybe rotate by Z.
My attempt at a solution is take the entire picture and do an "overlapping" sweep, and find the difference. Where I have a minimum, I have the proper X,Y shift. This however has two problems:
It's slow. way too slow.
it can't do rotation, without being even more slow due to search space increase.
image1 = cv2.imread('img1.png')
print(image1.shape)
img1 = cv2.cvtColor(image1,cv2.COLOR_BGR2GRAY)
nw1, nh1 = img1.shape
nw15, nh15 = int(nw1/2), int(nh1/2)
# load image 2
image2 = cv2.imread('img2.png')
img2 = cv2.cvtColor(image2,cv2.COLOR_BGR2GRAY)
nw2, nh2 = img2.shape
nw25, nh25 = int(nw2/2), int(nh2/2)
# generate base canvas, note that img1 could be top left of img2, or img2 could be top left of img1
# the search space of this is very large
nw, nh = nw1+nw2*2, nh1+nh2*2
cnw, cnh = int(nw/2), int(nh/2) # get the center point for later calculations
base_image1 = np.ones((nw,nh), np.uint8)*255 # make the background white
base_image1[cnw-nw15: cnw+nw15, cnh-nh15: cnh+nh15] = img1 # set the first image in the center
# create the image we want to "sweep over" we "pre-allocate" since creating new ones is expensive.
sweep_image = np.zeros((nw,nh), np.uint8) # keep at 0 for BLACK
import time
stime = time.time()
total_blend = []
# sweep over my search space!
for x_s in np.arange(20, 80): # limit search space so it finish this year
for y_s in np.arange(300, 500): # limit search space so it finish this year
w1, w2 = cnw-nw25+x_s, cnw+nw25+x_s # get the width slice to set our sweep image
h1, h2 = cnh-nh25+y_s, cnh+nh25+y_s # get the height slice to set our sweep image
sweep_image[w1: w2, h1: h2] = img2 # set the image
diff = cv2.absdiff(base_image1, sweep_image) # calculate the difference
total_blend.append([x_s, y_s, np.sum([diff])]) # store the transformation and coordinates
sweep_image[w1: w2, h1: h2] = 0 # reset back to zero
cv2.imshow('diff',diff)
cv2.waitKey(0)
print(time.time() - stime)
# convert to array
total_blend = np.array(total_blend)
mymin = np.min(total_blend[:,2])
print(total_blend[total_blend[:,2]==mymin]) # get the best coordinates for translation
Example below:
Example 1: Note the giant white borders, due to making sure the images the same size across the ENTIRE search space. Example 1, here is an ok ish match, but notice how the dark regions aren't very dark.
Example 2: (large white borders), but notice how the dark regions are actually black. This is close to minimum.
All help and thoughts appreciated. Is there a way to dictate the "size" of feature detectors? Is there a faster way to sweep? Maybe some RMSE and numpy eigenvalues - this is linear algebra after all...?
I am using python3, opencv2.

So far have gone with creating my own Keypoints that is similar to a Dense Feature Dector. Unlike SIFT/Corners/ORBs or any of those that find small features, a Dense Feature can be thought of as taking keypoints in a grid across the entire image.
(More here)
https://subscription.packtpub.com/book/application-development/9781785283932/10/ch10lvl1sec81/what-is-a-dense-feature-detector

Related

How to remove small connected objects using OpenCV

I use OpenCV and Python and I want to remove the small connected object from my image.
I have the following binary image as input:
The image is the result of this code:
dilation = cv2.dilate(dst,kernel,iterations = 2)
erosion = cv2.erode(dilation,kernel,iterations = 3)
I want to remove the objects highlighted in red:
How can I achieve this using OpenCV?
How about with connectedComponentsWithStats (doc):
# find all of the connected components (white blobs in your image).
# im_with_separated_blobs is an image where each detected blob has a different pixel value ranging from 1 to nb_blobs - 1.
nb_blobs, im_with_separated_blobs, stats, _ = cv2.connectedComponentsWithStats(im)
# stats (and the silenced output centroids) gives some information about the blobs. See the docs for more information.
# here, we're interested only in the size of the blobs, contained in the last column of stats.
sizes = stats[:, -1]
# the following lines result in taking out the background which is also considered a component, which I find for most applications to not be the expected output.
# you may also keep the results as they are by commenting out the following lines. You'll have to update the ranges in the for loop below.
sizes = sizes[1:]
nb_blobs -= 1
# minimum size of particles we want to keep (number of pixels).
# here, it's a fixed value, but you can set it as you want, eg the mean of the sizes or whatever.
min_size = 150
# output image with only the kept components
im_result = np.zeros_like(im_with_separated_blobs)
# for every component in the image, keep it only if it's above min_size
for blob in range(nb_blobs):
if sizes[blob] >= min_size:
# see description of im_with_separated_blobs above
im_result[im_with_separated_blobs == blob + 1] = 255
Output :
In order to remove objects automatically you need to locate them in the image.
From the image you provided I see nothing that distinguishes the 7 highlighted items from others.
You have to tell your computer how to recognize objects you don't want. If they look the same, this is not possible.
If you have multiple images where the objects always look like that you could use template matching techniques.
Also the closing operation doesn't make much sense to me.
#For isolated or unconnected blobs: Try this (you can set noise_removal_threshold to whatever you like and make it relative to the largest contour for example or a nominal value like 100 or 25).
mask = np.zeros_like(img)
for contour in contours:
area = cv2.contourArea(contour)
if area > noise_removal_threshold:
cv2.fillPoly(mask, [contour], 255)
Removing small connected components by area is called area opening. OpenCV does not have this as a function, it can be implemented as shown in other answers. But most other image processing packages will have an area opening function.
For example using scikit-image:
import skimage
import imageio.v3 as iio
img = iio.imread('cQMZm.png')[:,:,0]
out = skimage.morphology.area_opening(img, area_threshold=150, connectivity=2)
For example using DIPlib:
import diplib as dip
out = dip.AreaOpening(img, filterSize=150, connectivity=2)
PS: The DIPlib implementation is noticeably faster. Disclaimer: I'm an author of DIPlib.

Python OpenCV HoughLinesP Fails to Detect Lines

I am using OpenCV HoughlinesP to find horizontal and vertical lines. It is not finding any lines most of the time. Even when it finds a lines it is not even close to actual image.
import cv2
import numpy as np
img = cv2.imread('image_with_edges.jpg')
gray = cv2.cvtColor(img,cv2.COLOR_BGR2GRAY)
flag,b = cv2.threshold(gray,0,255,cv2.THRESH_OTSU)
element = cv2.getStructuringElement(cv2.MORPH_CROSS,(1,1))
cv2.erode(b,element)
edges = cv2.Canny(b,10,100,apertureSize = 3)
lines = cv2.HoughLinesP(edges,1,np.pi/2,275, minLineLength = 100, maxLineGap = 200)[0].tolist()
for x1,y1,x2,y2 in lines:
for index, (x3,y3,x4,y4) in enumerate(lines):
if y1==y2 and y3==y4: # Horizontal Lines
diff = abs(y1-y3)
elif x1==x2 and x3==x4: # Vertical Lines
diff = abs(x1-x3)
else:
diff = 0
if diff < 10 and diff is not 0:
del lines[index]
gridsize = (len(lines) - 2) / 2
cv2.line(img,(x1,y1),(x2,y2),(0,0,255),2)
cv2.imwrite('houghlines3.jpg',img)
Input Image:
Output Image: (see the Red Line):
#ljetibo Try this with:
c_6.jpg
There's quite a bit wrong here so I'll just start from the beginning.
Ok, first thing you do after opening an image is tresholding. I recommend strongly that you have another look at the OpenCV manual on tresholding and the exact meaning of the treshold methods.
The manual mentions that
cv2.threshold(src, thresh, maxval, type[, dst]) → retval, dst
the special value THRESH_OTSU may be combined with one of the above
values. In this case, the function determines the optimal threshold
value using the Otsu’s algorithm and uses it instead of the specified
thresh .
I know it's a bit confusing because you don't actully combine THRESH_OTSU with any of the other methods (THRESH_BINARY etc...), unfortunately that manual can be like that. What this method actually does is it assumes that there's a "foreground" and a "background" that follow a bi-modal histogram and then applies the THRESH_BINARY I believe.
Imagine this as if you're taking an image of a cathedral or a high building mid day. On a sunny day the sky will be very bright and blue, and the cathedral/building will be quite a bit darker. This means the group of pixels belonging to the sky will all have high brightness values, that is will be on the right side of the histogram, and the pixels belonging to the church will be darker, that is to the middle and left side of the histogram.
Otsu uses this to try and guess the right "cutoff" point, called thresh. For your image Otsu's alg. supposes that all that white on the side of the map is the background, and the map itself the foreground. Therefore your image after thresholding looks like this:
After this point it's not hard to guess what goes wrong. But let's go on, What you're trying to achieve is, I believe, something like this:
flag,b = cv2.threshold(gray,160,255,cv2.THRESH_BINARY)
Then you go on, and try to erode the image. I'm not sure why you're doing this, was your intention to "bold" the lines, or was your intention to remove noise. In any case you never assigned the result of erosion to something. Numpy arrays, which is the way images are represented, are mutable but it's not the way the syntax works:
cv2.erode(src, kernel, [optionalOptions] ) → dst
So you have to write:
b = cv2.erode(b,element)
Ok, now for the element and how the erosion works. Erosion drags a kernel over an image. Kernel is a simple matrix with 1's and 0's in it. One of the elements of that matrix, usually centre one, is called an anchor. An anchor is the element that will be replaced at the end of the operation. When you created
cv2.getStructuringElement(cv2.MORPH_CROSS, (1, 1))
what you created is actually a 1x1 matrix (1 column, 1 row). This makes erosion completely useless.
What erosion does, is firstly retrieves all the values of pixel brightness from the original image where the kernel element, overlapping the image segment, has a "1". Then it finds a minimal value of retrieved pixels and replaces the anchor with that value.
What this means, in your case, is that you drag [1] matrix over the image, compare if the source image pixel brightness is larger, equal or smaller than itself and then you replace it with itself.
If your intention was to remove "noise", then it's probably better to use a rectangular kernel over the image. Think of it this way, "noise" is that thing that "doesn't fit in" with the surroundings. So if you compare your centre pixel with it's surroundings and you find it doesn't fit, it's most likely noise.
Additionally, I've said it replaces the anchor with the minimal value retrieved by the kernel. Numerically, minimal value is 0, which is coincidentally how black is represented in the image. This means that in your case of a predominantly white image, erosion would "bloat up" the black pixels. Erosion would replace the 255 valued white pixels with 0 valued black pixels if they're in the reach of the kernel. In any case it shouldn't be of a shape (1,1), ever.
>>> cv2.getStructuringElement(cv2.MORPH_ELLIPSE, (3, 3))
array([[0, 1, 0],
[1, 1, 1],
[0, 1, 0]], dtype=uint8)
If we erode the second image with a 3x3 rectangular kernel we get the image bellow.
Ok, now we got that out of the way, next thing you do is you find edges using Canny edge detection. The image you get from that is:
Ok, now we look for EXACTLY vertical and EXACTLY horizontal lines ONLY. Of course there are no such lines apart from the meridian on the left of the image (is that what it's called?) and the end image you get after you did it right would be this:
Now since you never described your exact idea, and my best guess is that you want the parallels and meridians, you'll have more luck on maps with lesser scale because those aren't lines to begin with, they are curves. Additionally, is there a specific reason to get a Probability Hough done? The "regular" Hough doesn't suffice?
Sorry for the too-long post, hope it helps a bit.
Text here was added as a request for clarification from the OP Nov. 24th. because there's no way to fit the answer into a char limited comment.
I'd suggest OP asks a new question more specific to the detection of curves because you are dealing with curves op, not horizontal and vertical lines.
There are several ways to detect curves but none of them are easy. In the order of simplest-to-implement to hardest:
Use RANSAC algorithm. Develop a formula describing the nature of the long. and lat. lines depending on the map in question. I.e. latitude curves will almost be a perfect straight lines on the map when you're near the equator, with the equator being the perfectly straight line, but will be very curved, resembling circle segments, when you're at high latitudes (near the poles). SciPy already has RANSAC implemented as a class all you have to do is find and the programatically define the model you want to try to fit to the curves. Of course there's the ever-usefull 4dummies text here. This is the easiest because all you have to do is the math.
A bit harder to do would be to create a rectangular grid and then try to use cv findHomography to warp the grid into place on the image. For various geometric transformations you can do to the grid you can check out OpenCv manual. This is sort of a hack-ish approach and might work worse than 1. because it depends on the fact that you can re-create a grid with enough details and objects on it that cv can identify the structures on the image you're trying to warp it to. This one requires you to do similar math to 1. and just a bit of coding to compose the end solution out of several different functions.
To actually do it. There are mathematically neat ways of describing curves as a list of tangent lines on the curve. You can try to fit a bunch of shorter HoughLines to your image or image segment and then try to group all found lines and determine, by assuming that they're tangents to a curve, if they really follow a curve of the desired shape or are they random. See this paper on this matter. Out of all approaches this one is the hardest because it requires a quite a bit of solo-coding and some math about the method.
There could be easier ways, I've never actually had to deal with curve detection before. Maybe there are tricks to do it easier, I don't know. If you ask a new question, one that hasn't been closed as an answer already you might have more people notice it. Do make sure to ask a full and complete question on the exact topic you're interested in. People won't usually spend so much time writing on such a broad topic.
To show you what you can do with just Hough transform check out bellow:
import cv2
import numpy as np
def draw_lines(hough, image, nlines):
n_x, n_y=image.shape
#convert to color image so that you can see the lines
draw_im = cv2.cvtColor(image, cv2.COLOR_GRAY2BGR)
for (rho, theta) in hough[0][:nlines]:
try:
x0 = np.cos(theta)*rho
y0 = np.sin(theta)*rho
pt1 = ( int(x0 + (n_x+n_y)*(-np.sin(theta))),
int(y0 + (n_x+n_y)*np.cos(theta)) )
pt2 = ( int(x0 - (n_x+n_y)*(-np.sin(theta))),
int(y0 - (n_x+n_y)*np.cos(theta)) )
alph = np.arctan( (pt2[1]-pt1[1])/( pt2[0]-pt1[0]) )
alphdeg = alph*180/np.pi
#OpenCv uses weird angle system, see: http://docs.opencv.org/3.0-beta/doc/py_tutorials/py_imgproc/py_houghlines/py_houghlines.html
if abs( np.cos( alph - 180 )) > 0.8: #0.995:
cv2.line(draw_im, pt1, pt2, (255,0,0), 2)
if rho>0 and abs( np.cos( alphdeg - 90)) > 0.7:
cv2.line(draw_im, pt1, pt2, (0,0,255), 2)
except:
pass
cv2.imwrite("/home/dino/Desktop/3HoughLines.png", draw_im,
[cv2.IMWRITE_PNG_COMPRESSION, 12])
img = cv2.imread('a.jpg')
gray = cv2.cvtColor(img,cv2.COLOR_BGR2GRAY)
flag,b = cv2.threshold(gray,160,255,cv2.THRESH_BINARY)
cv2.imwrite("1tresh.jpg", b)
element = np.ones((3,3))
b = cv2.erode(b,element)
cv2.imwrite("2erodedtresh.jpg", b)
edges = cv2.Canny(b,10,100,apertureSize = 3)
cv2.imwrite("3Canny.jpg", edges)
hough = cv2.HoughLines(edges, 1, np.pi/180, 200)
draw_lines(hough, b, 100)
As you can see from the image bellow, straight lines are only longitudes. Latitudes are not as straight therefore for each latitude you have several detected lines that behave like tangents on the line. Blue drawn lines are drawn by the if abs( np.cos( alph - 180 )) > 0.8: while the red drawn lines are drawn by rho>0 and abs( np.cos( alphdeg - 90)) > 0.7 condition. Pay close attention when comparing the original image with the image with lines drawn on it. The resemblance is uncanny (heh, get it?) but because they're not lines a lot of it only looks like junk. (especially that highest detected latitude line that seems like it's too "angled" but in reality those lines make a perfect tangent to the latitude line on its thickest point, just as hough algorithm demands it). Acknowledge that there are limitations to detecting curves with a line detection algorithm

Detecting an approaching object

I read this blog post where he uses a Laser and a Webcam to estimated the distance of the cardboard from the Webcam.
I had another idea about that. I don't want to calculate the distance from the webcam.
I want to check if an object is approaching the webcam. The algorithm, according to me, will be something like:
Detect the object in the webcam feed.
If the object is approaching the webcam it'll grow larger and larger in the video feed.
Use this data for further calculations.
Since I want to detect random objects, I am using the findContours() method to find the contours in the video feed. Using that, I will at least have the outlines of the objects in the video feed. The source code is:
import numpy as np
import cv2
vid=cv2.VideoCapture(0)
ans, instant=vid.read()
average=np.float32(instant)
cv2.accumulateWeighted(instant, average, 0.01)
background=cv2.convertScaleAbs(average)
while(1):
_,f=vid.read()
imgray=cv2.cvtColor(f, cv2.COLOR_BGR2GRAY)
ret, thresh=cv2.threshold(imgray,127,255,0)
diff=cv2.absdiff(f, background)
cv2.imshow("input", f)
cv2.imshow("Difference", diff)
if cv2.waitKey(5)==27:
break
cv2.destroyAllWindows()
The output is:
I am stuck here. I have the contours stored in an array. What do I do with it when the size increases? How do I proceed?
One trouble here is recognising and differentiating the moving objects from other stuff in the video feed. An approach might be to let the camera 'learn' what the background looks like with no object. Then you can constantly compare its input against this background. One way to get the background is to use a running average.
Any difference greater than a small threshold means there is a moving object. If you constantly display this difference, you basically have a motion tracker. The size of the objects is simply the sum of all the non-zero (thresholded) pixels, or their bounding rectangles. You can track this size and use it to guess whether the object is moving closer or further. Morphological operations can help group the contours into one cohesive object.
Since it will be tracking ANY movement, if there are two objects, they will be counted together. Here is where you can use the contours to find and track individual objects, e.g. using the contour bounds or centroids. You could also possibly separate them by colour.
Here are some results using this strategy (the grey blob is my hand):
It actually did a fairly good job of guessing which way my hand was moving.
Code:
import cv2
import numpy as np
AVERAGE_ALPHA = 0.2 # 0-1 where 0 never adapts, and 1 instantly adapts
MOVEMENT_THRESHOLD = 30 # Lower values pick up more movement
REDUCED_SIZE = (400, 600)
MORPH_KERNEL = np.ones((10, 10), np.uint8)
def reduce_image(input_image):
"""Make the image easier to deal with."""
reduced = cv2.resize(input_image, REDUCED_SIZE)
reduced = cv2.cvtColor(reduced, cv2.COLOR_BGR2GRAY)
return reduced
# Initialise
vid = cv2.VideoCapture(0)
average = None
old_sizes = np.zeros(20)
size_update_index = 0
while (True):
got_frame, frame = vid.read()
if got_frame:
# Reduce image
reduced = reduce_image(frame)
if average is None: average = np.float32(reduced)
# Get background
cv2.accumulateWeighted(reduced, average, AVERAGE_ALPHA)
background = cv2.convertScaleAbs(average)
# Get thresholded difference image
movement = cv2.absdiff(reduced, background)
_, threshold = cv2.threshold(movement, MOVEMENT_THRESHOLD, 255, cv2.THRESH_BINARY)
# Apply morphology to help find object
dilated = cv2.dilate(threshold, MORPH_KERNEL, iterations=10)
closed = cv2.morphologyEx(dilated, cv2.MORPH_CLOSE, MORPH_KERNEL)
# Get contours
contours, _ = cv2.findContours(closed, cv2.RETR_TREE, cv2.CHAIN_APPROX_SIMPLE)
cv2.drawContours(closed, contours, -1, (150, 150, 150), -1)
# Find biggest bounding rectangle
areas = [cv2.contourArea(c) for c in contours]
if (areas != list()):
max_index = np.argmax(areas)
max_cont = contours[max_index]
x, y, w, h = cv2.boundingRect(max_cont)
cv2.rectangle(closed, (x, y), (x+w, y+h), (255, 255, 255), 5)
# Guess movement direction
size = w*h
if size > old_sizes.mean():
print "Towards"
else:
print "Away"
# Update object size
old_sizes[size_update_index] = size
size_update_index += 1
if (size_update_index) >= len(old_sizes): size_update_index = 0
# Display image
cv2.imshow('RaptorVision', closed)
Obviously this needs more work in terms of identifying, selecting and tracking the objects etc (at the moment it does horribly if there is something else moving in the background). There are also many parameters to vary and tweak (the ones set are what worked well for my system). I'll leave that up to you though.
Some links:
background extraction
motion tracking
If you want to get a bit more high-tech with the background removal, have a look here:
wallflower
Detect the object in the webcam feed.
If the object is approaching the webcam it'll grow larger and larger in the video feed.
Use this data for further calculations.
Good idea.
If you want to use the contour detection approach, you could do it the following way:
You have a series of Images I1, I2, ... In
Do a contour detection on each one. C1, C2, ..., Cn (Contour is a set of points in OpenCV)
Take a large enough sample on your Image i and i+1: S_i \leq C_i, i \in 1...n
Check for all points in your sample for the nearest point on i+1. Then you trajectorys for all your points.
Check if this trajectorys point mostly outwards (tricky part ;)
If they appear outwards for a suffiecent number of frames your contour got bigger.
Alternative you could try to prune the points that are not part of the correct contour and work with a covering rectangle. It's very easy to check the size that way, but i don't knwo how easy it will be to choose the "correct" points.

PIL: scale image while maintaing highest possible quality

I'm using PIL to scale images that range anywhere from 600px wide to 2400px wide down to around 200px wide. I've already incorporated Image.ANTIALIAS and set quality=95 to try and get the highest quality image possible.
However the scaled down images still have pretty poor quality compared to the originals.
Here's the code that I'm using:
# Open the original image
fp = urllib.urlopen(image_path)
img = cStringIO.StringIO(fp.read())
im = Image.open(img)
im = im.convert('RGB')
# Resize the image
resized_image = ImageOps.fit(im, size, Image.ANTIALIAS)
# Save the image
resized_image_object = cStringIO.StringIO()
resized_image.save(resized_image_object, image_type, quality=95)
What's the best way to scale an image along these ratios while preserving as much of the image quality as possible?
I should note that my primary goal is get the maximum quality image possible. I'm not really concerned with how efficient the process is time wise.
If you can't get results with the native resize options in PIL, you can manually calculate the resize pixel values by running them through your own resizing function. There are three main algorithms (that I know of) for resizing images:
Nearest Neighbor
Bilinear Interpolation
Bicubic Interpolation
The last one will produce the highest quality image at the longest calculation time. To do this, imagine the pixel layout of the the smaller image, then scale it up to match the larger image and think about where the new pixel locations would be over the old ones. Then for each new pixel take the average value of the 16 nearest pixels (4x4 radius around it) and use that as its new value.
The resulting values for each of the pixels in the small image will be a smooth but clear resized version of the large image.
For further reading look here: Wikipedia - Bicubic interpolation
Try a different approach. I'm not sure if this will help, but I did something similar a while back:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/13211834/1339024
It may be that the original image on the urlpath is not that great quality to begin with. But if you want, try my script. I made it to shrink images in a given directory, but this portion could be of use:
parentDir = "Some\\Path"
width = 200
height = 200
cdpi = 75
cquality = 95
a = Image.open(parentDir+'\\'+imgfile) # Change this to your url type
iw,ih = a.size
if iw > width or ih > height:
pcw = width/float(iw)
pch = height/float(ih)
if pcw <= pch:
LPC = pcw
else:
LPC = pch
if 'gif' in imgfile:
a = a.convert("RGB")#,dither=Image.NONE)
a = a.resize((int(iw*LPC),int(ih*LPC)),Image.ANTIALIAS)
a = a.convert("P", dither=Image.NONE, palette=Image.ADAPTIVE)
a.save(outputDir+"\\"+imgfile,dpi=(cdpi,cdpi), quality=cquality)
else:
a = a.resize((int(iw*LPC),int(ih*LPC)),Image.ANTIALIAS)
a.save(outputDir+"\\"+imgfile,dpi=(cdpi,cdpi), quality=cquality)

Trim scanned images with PIL?

What would be the approach to trim an image that's been input using a scanner and therefore has a large white/black area?
the entropy solution seems problematic and overly intensive computationally. Why not edge detect?
I just wrote this python code to solve this same problem for myself. My background was dirty white-ish, so the criteria that I used was darkness and color. I simplified this criteria by just taking the smallest of the R, B or B value for each pixel, so that black or saturated red both stood out the same. I also used the average of the however many darkest pixels for each row or column. Then I started at each edge and worked my way in till I crossed a threshold.
Here is my code:
#these values set how sensitive the bounding box detection is
threshold = 200 #the average of the darkest values must be _below_ this to count (0 is darkest, 255 is lightest)
obviousness = 50 #how many of the darkest pixels to include (1 would mean a single dark pixel triggers it)
from PIL import Image
def find_line(vals):
#implement edge detection once, use many times
for i,tmp in enumerate(vals):
tmp.sort()
average = float(sum(tmp[:obviousness]))/len(tmp[:obviousness])
if average <= threshold:
return i
return i #i is left over from failed threshold finding, it is the bounds
def getbox(img):
#get the bounding box of the interesting part of a PIL image object
#this is done by getting the darekest of the R, G or B value of each pixel
#and finding were the edge gest dark/colored enough
#returns a tuple of (left,upper,right,lower)
width, height = img.size #for making a 2d array
retval = [0,0,width,height] #values will be disposed of, but this is a black image's box
pixels = list(img.getdata())
vals = [] #store the value of the darkest color
for pixel in pixels:
vals.append(min(pixel)) #the darkest of the R,G or B values
#make 2d array
vals = np.array([vals[i * width:(i + 1) * width] for i in xrange(height)])
#start with upper bounds
forupper = vals.copy()
retval[1] = find_line(forupper)
#next, do lower bounds
forlower = vals.copy()
forlower = np.flipud(forlower)
retval[3] = height - find_line(forlower)
#left edge, same as before but roatate the data so left edge is top edge
forleft = vals.copy()
forleft = np.swapaxes(forleft,0,1)
retval[0] = find_line(forleft)
#and right edge is bottom edge of rotated array
forright = vals.copy()
forright = np.swapaxes(forright,0,1)
forright = np.flipud(forright)
retval[2] = width - find_line(forright)
if retval[0] >= retval[2] or retval[1] >= retval[3]:
print "error, bounding box is not legit"
return None
return tuple(retval)
if __name__ == '__main__':
image = Image.open('cat.jpg')
box = getbox(image)
print "result is: ",box
result = image.crop(box)
result.show()
For starters, Here is a similar question. Here is a related question. And a another related question.
Here is just one idea, there are certainly other approaches. I would select an arbitrary crop edge and then measure the entropy* on either side of the line, then proceed to re-select the crop line (probably using something like a bisection method) until the entropy of the cropped-out portion falls below a defined threshold. As I think, you may need to resort to a brute root-finding method as you will not have a good indication of when you have cropped too little. Then repeat for the remaining 3 edges.
*I recall discovering that the entropy method in the referenced website was not completely accurate, but I could not find my notes (I'm sure it was in a SO post, however.)
Edit:
Other criteria for the "emptiness" of an image portion (other than entropy) might be contrast ratio or contrast ratio on an edge-detect result.

Categories