International Journal of Computer Vision

, Volume 84, Issue 3, pp 308–324 | Cite as

Optimizing Gabor Filter Design for Texture Edge Detection and Classification

  • Roman Sandler
  • Michael Lindenbaum


An effective and efficient texture analysis method, based on a new criterion for designing Gabor filter sets, is proposed. The commonly used filter sets are usually designed for optimal signal representation. We propose here an alternative criterion for designing the filter set. We consider a set of filters and its response to pairs of harmonic signals. Two signals are considered separable if the corresponding two sets of vector responses are disjoint in at least one of the components. We propose an algorithm for deriving the set of Gabor filters that maximizes the fraction of separable harmonic signal pairs in a given frequency range. The resulting filters differ significantly from the traditional ones. We test these maximal harmonic discrimination (MHD) filters in several texture analysis tasks: clustering, recognition, and edge detection. It turns out that the proposed filters perform much better than the traditional ones in these tasks. They can achieve performance similar to that of state-of-the-art, distribution based (texton) methods, while being simpler and more computationally efficient.


Texture Gabor kernels Edge detection Classification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bovik, A. C., Clark, M., & Geisler, W. S. (1990). Multichannel texture analysis using localized spatial filters. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 12(1), 55–73. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dana, K. J., van Ginneken, B., Nayar, S. K., & Koenderink, J. J. (1999). Reflectance and texture of real world surfaces. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 18(1), 1–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Daugman, J. G. (1985). Uncertainty relation for resolution, spatial frequency, and orientation optimized by 2D visual cortical filters. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 1, 1160–1169. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Field, D. J. (1987). Relation between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 4(12), 2379–2394. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fogel, I., & Sagi, D. (1989). Gabor filters as texture discriminator. BioCyber, 61, 102–113. Google Scholar
  6. Greenspan, H., Belongie, S., Perona, P., Goodman, R., Rackshit, S., & Anderson, C. H. (1994). Overcomplete steerable pyramid filters and rotation invariance. In CVPR (pp. 222–228). Google Scholar
  7. Lee, T. S. (1996). Image representation using 2D Gabor wavelets. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 18(10), 959–971. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Leung, T., & Malik, J. (2001). Representing and recognizing the visual appearance of materials using three-dimensional textons. International Journal of Computer Vision, 43(1), 29–44. zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Liu, X., & Wang, D. (2003). Texture classification using spectral histograms. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 12(6), 661–670. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Malik, J., & Perona, P. (1990). Preattentive texture discrimination with early vision mechanism. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 7(5), 923–932. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Malik, J., Belongie, S., Leung, T. K., & Shi, J. (2001). Contour and texture analysis for image segmentation. International Journal of Computer Vision, 43(1), 7–27. zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Martin, D., Fowlkes, C., Tal, D., & Malik, J. (2001). A database of human segmented natural images and its application to evaluating segmentation algorithms and measuring ecological statistics. In ICCV (Vol. II, pp. 416–423). Google Scholar
  13. Martin, D., Fowlkes, C., & Malik, J. (2004). Learning to detect natural image boundaries using local brightness, color, and texture cues. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 26(5), 530–549. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Randen, T., & Husoy, J. H. (1999). Filtering for texture classification: a comparative study. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 21(4), 291–310. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sandler, R., & Lindenbaum, M. (2006). Gabor filter analysis for texture segmentation. In CVPRW (p. 178), June 2006. Google Scholar
  16. Tsai, D. M., Wu, S. K., & Chen, M. C. (2001). Optimal Gabor filter design for texture segmentation using stochastic optimization. Image and Vision Computing, 19(5), 299–316. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Varma, M., & Zisserman, A. (2002). Classifying images of materials: achieving viewpoint and illumination independence. European Conference on Computer Vision, 3, 255–271. Google Scholar
  18. Varma, M., & Zisserman, A. (2003). Texture classification: are filter banks necessary? In CVPR (Vol. 2, pp. 691–698), June 2003. Google Scholar
  19. Weldon, T. P., Higgins, W. E., & Dunn, D. F. (1996). Efficient Gabor filter design for texture segmentation. Pattern Recognition, 29(12), 2005–2015. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentTechnion, IITHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations