Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Image De-Noising
GREYCstoration is an open-source tool able to de-noise, inpaint, or resize 2D color images. This is a command-line program developed by the IMAGE team of the GREYC Lab in France and is available for Unix, Mac, and Windows systems under the CeCILL license. The algorithm is based on anisotropic diffusion partial differential equations. These equations are able to smooth an image while preserving its main structures. The demo page presents interesting examples of color image de-noising and reconstruction. This is a serious free alternative to commercial products like Noise Ninja or Neat Image that perform the same kinds of operations. The tool is still a little bit hard to use (command-line based), but I hope the simple C++ API will ease the integration of the algorithm in more user-friendly interfaces. Previous versions of GREYCstoration are already available in Digikam and Krita.
I'm anxious to try this out on a few images I have that need considerable work. The demo images are more than a little impressive. Excellent work! Thanks You!
The graphics on their website absolutely suck.
So does this mean I can start shooting my photos in ISO 400 and cleaning them up later?
Can it remove the noise commonly used in CAPTCHA images? Will this be the next weapon in the war against spammers?
Better for resizing than using the Lanczos filter?
Another great free tool is called Picture Cooler. It rivals or exceeds Noise Ninja for certain images. Download it here: http://denoiser.shorturl.com/
. size.matter/
But if you want images with less noise, try and buy a camera with a larger sensor. dSLR's have large sensors as do many Fuji cameras including their tiny P&S models. Most sensors on subcompact P&S cameras measure only 5.76x4.29mm (1/2.5"). Many of the smaller cameras by Fuji use a 1/1.8" sensor that measures 7.18x5.32mm.
A nice explanation of noise and sensor size is here: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel
This looks like it's the closest to the image enhancement on the Enterprise (or any other tv show or movie) that i'm going to come. Very cool! Now to pick out crystal clear faces from distant blurry security cameras...
It seems to perform a lot better when dealing with artificially-added noises than real-life images, as if it already knows how to tackle them.
This pyramid photo has basically been 'ruined' after the denoising, I wonder if we added some synthetic noises in the background while leaving the stone face as is, would this app be able to denoise correctly?
Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
This tool looks very cool, but today's semi-pro and pro (and even some consumer grade) cameras will store their images in a raw format which preserves 12 bits per color channel at a minimum.
GIMP can't deal with these. Tools such as ufraw can convert them to 8 bits/channel images such as JPEG but don't allow you to actually manipulate the image in its native color resolution.
Linux seriously needs a good image manipulation tool such as the GIMP with 16-bit or even 32-bit per color channel support built-in. This is particularly important for operations like sharpening.
Cinepaint will do it but it's way behind in features compared with GIMP these days.
What's the hold up with GIMP anyway? You'd think its developers would take this kind of issue seriously and would fix the engine to natively do, say, 32 bits per color channel internally.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
It'd be useful to have a sample of the filter applied to video for denoising/scaling down, would be much easier to spot how good it actually is compared to other methods. It seems to introduce its own artifacts in the form of those swirly-patterns, would they look natural from frame-to-frame?
This looks like a great app to use for generating more detailed height maps for flight sims. You could zoom in on your height map to the location your aitcraft if flying towards use this tool to create a more detailed height map out of that smaller height map image and then wack that new mesh into your game as you get closer to the ground.
Their examples even include an image of Boba Fett skiing!t ion/img/res_ski.png
http://www.greyc.ensicaen.fr/~dtschump/greycstora
On a more serious note, this look pretty useful. I've been able to get quite good results on many images with a combination of blurring, denoising, unsharp masking and other algorithms in Photoshop and the GIMP, but nothing beats a proper anisotropic diffusion. And in the versions of the aforementioned software I've used, there's no such thing available (maybe in newer versions, so don't shoot me).
Too bad the inpainting part appears unfinished (at least the documentation says "to do"). Inpainting is the reconstruction of missing parts of the image from surrounding parts. I've managed to do successful inpainting by using a simple diffusion kernel (GIMP and PS allow to specify a custom convolution kernel), but this takes ages because you need to repeat the transformation until the image stabilizes, and you can only use dumb diffusion kernels like a square with a zero in the middle.
is a pretty good algorithm. We use it for MRI images. The biggest problem is setting the parameters. Fortunately it's an embarrassingly parallel algorithm so I wrote a version that will run realtime on a video card. It's pretty cool to move the slider and watch the noise fade away, move it further and some of the edges blur, further and you start to lose the image.
... from removing the Moire pattern often seen in scanned photographs, to interpolated image upsampling that doesn't seem blurred or pixelised. Perhaps it will also fare well in interpolating old 256-color dithered GIFs into full-color JPEGs with decent quality. [This is also a nice sumarry for those who don't want to read TFA...]
Most of the research this library uses as a basis has been known for quite some time; see the image upsampling link above. But it's nice to see this implemented as an actual library.
by taking off my glasses!!
I just took a look at the example images.. The before and after comparisons look very similar to the results you would get from Photoshop's "Smart Blur" tool. So this might be a new way of doing it, but I don't see anything exciting about it. Am I missing something? Or is someone simply making a fuss for the sake of finding a new algorithm with a fancy name?
... after those results, I don't want to hear any more bitching about reading yellow license plate numbers off of the reflection of a doorknob reflected in a one-pixel wide eyeball in a black and white security film shown in CSI!
I keep pressing my ear to my computer, but the pictures don't make any noise. They're actually pretty quiet.
Leave the gun, take the cannoli -- Clemenza, The Godfather
It can also take one image and repaint it in the style of another image, so you can take a black and white photo and a pencil sketch as inputs and end up with your photo rendered using parts of the pencil image which are similar in form.
Another trick it can pull is creating tileable textures from any image. Sometimes the results are a little surprising if you start off with a picture of people at a party but they are totally seamless.
It comes as a GIMP plugin and is easy to use if you are used to the GIMP.
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
While looking at these a voice in my head kept saying, "Enhance....Enhance....Enhance...."
but can it perform a "reverse algorithmic", CSI-style?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Fujifilm has announced plans to "bring back" Velvia 50:
? cid=7-7900-8678
:-)
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp
It's a new formulation, which they're tentatively calling "Velvia II," so don't write off Velvia 50 just yet
That's because they *removed* the noise, dummy! :]
Some of those "improved" images look like frames taken from a RealTV episode. You know the videos that were shot using .5 mega pixel video cameras and cell phones.
Me lost me cookie at the disco.
..Noiseware Community Edition??
They only have the PPC version in their download, is there a Universal Binary or intel binary floating around somwhere?
If you're experiencing a lot of noise at ISO400, it's time for a new camera.
Also, in response to your later post, what many DSLRs do for long exposures (usually taken at night and with high ISO and experience a lot of noise in the black areas) is to take another exposure immediately after the first one, but with the shutter closed. Then, the camera knows where the sensor noise is and can subtract it from the actual picture.
So if you take an 8 sec. exposure and your camera freezes up for the following 8 sec, you'll know why.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
They are overly smoothed and detail is destroyed. They look like the type of thing a noob makes upon discovering video filters. For example, look at the delicate features in the jellyfish or the pig's hair. This samples look more like demonstrations of soften or posterization filters.
Sure, he's a noob. That DT-MRI of gray matter paths in your brain based on diffusion tensors is purely the stuff of rank amateurs! Bah, next you will tell me free software authors can make a powerful and easy to use image editor. I'm sticking to well known commercial filters found in Paint Shop Pro version 1.0, you know the one that fits on a floppy. Yeah, that's the freedom program.
Oh wait, those other filters are not helping my pig. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong and need to leave that to the pros as well.
They should also use real, not artificial, noise.
Sufficiently advanced noise is indistinguishable from the stuff that comes out of a cheap imaging device, but it's not magic.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
It reduces noise by blurring. It does NOT add detail that wasn't there in the first place.
I realize you're most likely joking, but I really am sick of people making this mistake. Just because you can "enhance" an image does not mean that any piece of software can be fucking psychic.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
This pyramid photo has basically been 'ruined' after the denoising ...
Do you think? Are those details in the stone any more real than those in the sky? Some may have been lost, but I'm having a hard time deciding which should have stayed. The picture was sad to begin with.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
They should also use real, not artificial, noise.
Check out very impressive clean up of a PDA camera. That's good. Ordinary smoothing filters blur important details, like those in the watch or the baby's ear. How nice that it is already in Digikam, one of the easiest to use photo managers out there.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
nice troll
1990 called, they want their algorithm back.
Perona & Malik, PAMI 1990.
Someone above mentioned that the algo is embarrassingly parallel. Could it be implemented in realtime as a filter for emulators of older game consoles? I would be interested in seeing what this thing could do with a sonic or mario game, though I dunno how much color depth plays into it. Could maybe make psx or n64 games look less shitty. Might look even better than high-level emulation.
Sure, he's a noob. That DT-MRI of gray matter paths in your brain based on diffusion tensors is purely the stuff of rank amateurs!
Being a research scientist doesn't necessarily qualify someone as having a photographer's eye. Nobody's saying the guy couldn't research circles around any of us. What the parent poster said is his de-noise filter is way too aggressive and obscures image detail. That appears to be true, at least judging by the settings he's using for his demo shots.
Sufficiently advanced noise is indistinguishable from the stuff that comes out of a cheap imaging device
Not really true, because the noise that comes out of any imaging device (cheap or otherwise) is not random. It fits a particular profile that's unique to that model of device, or even that particular unit. Advanced photo filtering algorithms (including those used in the in-camera processors that convert raw image data to jpg image files) use that individual profile to filter noise. They're not trying to figure out what's noise and what isn't on the fly, which is at best an imperfect science, and that's being charitable. They have a good idea before they even look at an image what the noise is going to look like, so they do a better job of removing it without sacrificing detail.
The more advanced filters like NeatImage are also almost infinitely configurable in what noise they go after and where, and how aggressive they are. Now, this guy's algorithm seems to be pretty configurable as well, so maybe he just didn't use very good settings himself on most of his image demos, and the algorithm is actually capable of better results. He does seem like he's a better scientist than image-maker so that's entirely possible.
It would be interesting to see what could be done with this if it was given an intuitive GUI and put in the hands of some real photographers. (Yes, even real photographers have to shoot at ISO 800 and above occasionally, and would benefit from noise reduction that actually works without sacrificing detail.)
If you're referring to Olympus' "Digital Image Stabilization," here's how they describe it:
Digital Image Stabilization Mode uses a high ISO sensitivity and fast shutter speed to enable you to [blah blah blah]
Nothing fancy here about combining multiple exposures and detecting camera/subject movement; just using higher sensitivity than the 50 or 100 that many P&S users are used to, resulting in faster shutter speeds.
Horray!
5.3.4 COMPATIBILITY WITH THE GNU GPL
The Licensee can include a code that is subject to the provisions of one of the versions of the GNU GPL in the Modified or unmodified Software, and distribute that entire code under the terms of the same version of the GNU GPL.
The Licensee can include the Modified or unmodified Software in a code that is subject to the provisions of one of the versions of the GNU GPL, and distribute that entire code under the terms of the same version of the GNU GPL.
Hey I can do this effect in MS Paint with pencil!
The noise you have to worry about is random. The rest you can get rid of with a dark frame. The probability distribution of the noise may be unique to a particular device, but the noise itself is random.
Anisotropic diffusion works quite well. The example images DO look over smoothed, but that's just because he's got his k value cranked way up, probably to show the effect more clearly.
At first I thought the lightening was merely the loss of contrast. But it rather appears than an ambient light level has been added to the images. My best guess is that this is likely the average of the added noise. This makes sense if you consider that the idea is to take local hi-freq spikes and spread their influence around the image.
If it's anything like Samsung's ASR, then it does takes more than one exposure at different ISO settings. I don't remember where I read about it but I think it was on dpreview.com (on their forums).
http://www.greyc.ensicaen.fr/~dtschump/greycstorat ion/img/res_subtitle.png
"Sounds like somebody's got a case of the Mondays"
Who said french weren't geeky ?
Am pretty sure ImageMagick will work with 48-bit colourspace in PNG format.t ions.php#filtern tage.jpg
http://www.imagemagick.org/
It's hardly an intuitive program (does a GUI even exist?), but it'll sharpen/unsharpen/blur etc, and employs a much wider variety of resize algorithms.
http://www.imagemagick.org/script/command-line-op
http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/resize/filter_mo
I hacked it into my image processing library a year or so ago:
http://www.vips.ecs.soton.ac.uk/index.php?title=GR EYCstoration
The big issue was memory use: at least for the version I adapted, it needs 20x as much memory to run as the size of the image you want to process. So a 3k x 3k 8-bit RGB image needs 1GB of RAM. I blame CImg (I think). It needs reimplementing in a more practical image processing library. The results are nice though, if you play with the parameters a bit.
It would be nice to make this tool available as a GIMP plugin.
factor 966971: 966971
From TFA download page: http://www.haypocalc.com/wiki/Gimp_Plugin_GREYCsto ration
Nope, the noise that's left after subtracting a dark frame is still not random. The noise will have certain properties across the entire picture, depending on shutter speed. So you analyse one part of the picture that has as few subject details as possible, and then you can remove that same noise over the whole picture.
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
I once read about this fellow that had written a piece of software that, once he had scanned a visual image of a conventional phonograph record, enabled him to extract the sounds of the recording via the image of the grooves. It produced a recognizable result. It would be interesting to see if this visual cleanup software could be applied to phono record images to effectively smooth the vinyl or shellac surface, therefore reducing or eliminating the surface noise of an old recording. Of course there is software available that works purely on the sound signal, but perhaps something like this might be a useful adjunct?
I see that Slashdot is becoming Digg, where I first read this story two years ago. I have been using this algorithm on occasion from the command line since that time.
Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
That's all it is doing. And doing it evenly across the entire picture.
... if this filter was turned into a plug-in for a photo editing program that let you apply the various filter parameters differently to different areas it might be useful.
Removing noise from pictures is tricky
Most of their samples are "over smoothed" and look like plastic.
On Slashdot, actual cleverness is off-topic.
Uh... the dark frame IS a whole picture with no subject details, acquired under as close conditions as possible to the actual picture. So it does exactly what you describe, except better, because it's truly dark, not just underexposed. That gets rid of pattern noise (so called because there's a PATTERN).
Thermal CCD noise is truly random. Quantum mechanical level random.
The Mac binaries available on the download page are built for PPC macs. If you've got the developer tools installed on an Intel Mac, you'll want to modify the Makefile to change the X11PATH line to:
/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk/usr/X11R6
X11PATH =
Then just "make linux"
I'm researching ways to reduce the cost of subtitling low budget movies and this might be a great tool. Does anyone know if it or other software can do automatic removal of subtitles with inpainting? It doesn't have to be ultra-perfect but should make a reasonable background so subtitle from a different language can be added in place. Horizontal, but also vertical subtitle removal would be useful... I wonder how automatic it is.
Otherwise, very cool, I'll try this on removing the noise from the otherwise great pictures my new Fuji Finepix took of a live concert, practically in the dark with no flash.
Also to follow up the mention of thermal noise profiles, I wonder if you could take a black (lens cap on) photo and use that to train the algorithm. I believe that is used often to subtract noise in astrophotography...
This program has been known for years. The gimp and krita plugins were written in 2005.
o ration
o ration
r ita/greycstoration.html
1 /12/1744218&tid=39
For comparison with professional software, see:
http://www.haypocalc.com/wiki/Comparative_GREYCst
gimp plugin:
http://www.haypocalc.com/wiki/Gimp_Plugin_GREYCst
you can find this plugin in any recent version in Filters->Misc.
krita plugin:
http://www.valdyas.org/fading/index.cgi/hacking/k
Linux.com ran a article on it last year:
http://applications.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/0
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
(I'm not him although I know his work and his ex-supervisor)
;-)
Also consider CImage, by the same author. CImage is a C++ image processing template library (cue to how much C++ sucks compared to the language du jour and/or LISP/Python/Haskell/OCaml, etc
Concerning the inpainting algorithms that many here find impressive, there has been lots of work in this area. One of the seminal works is the paper at ICCV'99 by Efros and Leung. Many CS people will love that one since it is a fairly straightforward extention of the 1948 Markov model proposed by Shannon himself for the automated production of pseudo-english text (i.e. texts that look and sound english but really aren't). The Practice of Programming book by Kernighan and Pike makes use of that algorithm to compare various languages in a fun way.
The Tschumperlé algorithm works on different principles and is much faster, but their particular Markov model shows the impainting problem is not that difficult in practice.
Has ISO rating being abused by digital photography so much that nobody concerns shutter speed, aperture, and lighting anymore?
What fundamentally matters for high motion scene is faster shutter speed. Higher ISO sensitivity makes sure the picture is more easily exposed. Bigger aperture, as well as the scene being well-lit, let more light into the lens, so these two factors also help with exposure.
It is probably best illustrated by shooting a night scene. With dSLR or SLR, you can program long exposure of 2 seconds or more, so you can film at ISO 200 or lower. However, dP&S cameras can't do long exposure, so usually what happens is that the camera adjusts shutter speed to its maximum at ~1/15 (at which point hand shaking can make it blur) but raise the amplification, i.e., ISO rating. As a result, you get a picture where bright areas appear washed out and colorless, compared to dSLR/SLR where the color and details are nicely preserved.
Another extreme is filming high-speed motion, where a common practice is to make a scene or object brightly lit to compensate for faster shutter speed.
What differentiates a photographer and an amateur is that a photographer has all the options and know their trade-offs, but an amateur talks about ISO all the times because, unfortunately, that's the only adjustable metric about dP&S cameras. Even worse, digital ISO rating only has to do with amplification of sensor signal and not actual sensor sensitivity at all. As a result, you lose dynamic range when you amplify more in higher ISO mode.
I'd rather buy a camera phone than point and shoot...
I once had a signature.
This isn't new software, it's just a new release. My wife is a photographer and we've been using this with a Gimp plugin for quite awhile now.
o ration
Gimp plugin can be found here: http://www.haypocalc.com/wiki/Gimp_Plugin_GREYCst
It does ok and can salvage some photos, some, it can't.
Thanks Freshmeat!! ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Slashdot!!
Have you ever shot with Velvia ISO 50 film? -- it creates stunning details. I think Fujifilm discontinued it last year or so.
That's a total bummer. I only shoot film for Velvia 50 stuff anymore - the rest digital can handle. I figure if I'm going to fly out to California to see deserts in bloom, I'm not capturing them on a grainy poor-color technology. I'm surprised it wasn't one of the more popular films of late. Ah, well, I'll use up the case in my freezer sparingly and hang the last box next to my buggy whip.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Read the eff'n descriptions; though some are obscure, note that a few examples are, in fact, “non-artificial” noise. In particular, the shots from cheap CCD's (cameraphone, smartphone, disposable digi-cams, etc.) yield remarkably improved results. You only get shots like that with <100USD equipment, and you're not going to shell out for >300USD software to fix it, now are you? Something that works... for FREE! Sign me on.
Troll, back to your cave! In the meantime, let the hobbyist photophiles have their triumph when it's truly an achievement... and it is!
You got a problem with it? Then make something better!
Now I can finally set-up an external in Gimp for Unsharp Mask!
This post © Copyrite Duggeek, all rights reversed.