The Effect of Quantization Setting for Image Denoising Methods: An Empirical Study
Image denoising, which aims to recover a clean image from a noisy one, is a classical yet still active topic in low level vision due to its high value in various practical applications. Existing image denoising methods generally assume the noisy image is generated by adding an additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) to the clean image. Following this assumption, synthetic noisy images with ideal AWGN rather than real noisy images are usually used to test the performance of the denoising methods. Such synthetic noisy images, however, lack the necessary image quantification procedure which implies some pixel intensity values may be even negative or higher than the maximum of the value interval (e.g., 255), leading to a violation of the image coding. Consequently, this naturally raises the question: what is the difference between those two kinds of denoised images with and without quantization setting? In this paper, we first give an empirical study to answer this question. Experimental results demonstrate that the pixel value range of the denoised images with quantization setting tend to be narrower than that without quantization setting, as well as that of ground-truth images. In order to resolve this unwanted effect of quantization, we then propose an empirical trick for state-of-the-art weighted nuclear norm minimization (WNNM) based denoising method such that the pixel value interval of the denoised image with quantization setting accords with that of the corresponding ground-truth image. As a result, our findings can provide a deeper understanding on effect of quantization and its possible solutions.
KeywordsImage denoising Low level vision Quantization setting
This work is partly support by the National Science Foundation of China (NSFC) project under the contract No. 61271093, 61471146, and 61102037.
- 2.Buades, A., Coll, B., Morel, J.M.: A non-local algorithm for image denoising. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), vol. 2, pp. 60–65 (2005)Google Scholar
- 3.Buchanan, A.M., Fitzgibbon, A.W.: Damped Newton algorithms for matrix factorization with missing data. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), vol. 2, pp. 316–322 (2005)Google Scholar
- 4.Burger, H.C., Schuler, C.J., Harmeling, S.: Image denoising: can plain neural networks compete with BM3D? In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 2392–2399 (2012)Google Scholar
- 6.Chen, Y., Yu, W., Pock, T.: On learning optimized reaction diffusion processes for effective image restoration. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 5261–5269 (2015)Google Scholar
- 13.Gu, S., Zhang, L., Zuo, W., Feng, X.: Weighted nuclear norm minimization with application to image denoising. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 2862–2869 (2014)Google Scholar
- 16.Ke, Q., Kanade, T.: Robust L1 norm factorization in the presence of outliers and missing data by alternative convex programming. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), vol. 1, pp. 739–746 (2005)Google Scholar
- 17.Mairal, J., Bach, F., Ponce, J., Sapiro, G., Zisserman, A.: Non-local sparse models for image restoration. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp. 2272–2279 (2009)Google Scholar
- 21.Schmidt, U., Roth, S.: Shrinkage fields for effective image restoration. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 2774–2781 (2014)Google Scholar
- 22.Srebro, N., Jaakkola, T., et al.: Weighted low-rank approximations. In: ICML, vol. 3, pp. 720–727 (2003)Google Scholar
- 23.Tomasi, C., Manduchi, R.: Bilateral filtering for gray and color images. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp. 839–846 (1998)Google Scholar
- 26.Zoran, D., Weiss, Y.: From learning models of natural image patches to whole image restoration. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp. 479–486 (2011)Google Scholar