Advertisement

The Effect of Quantization Setting for Image Denoising Methods: An Empirical Study

  • Feng Pan
  • Zifei Yan
  • Kai Zhang
  • Hongzhi Zhang
  • Wangmeng Zuo
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 663)

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Image denoising Low level vision Quantization setting 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work is partly support by the National Science Foundation of China (NSFC) project under the contract No. 61271093, 61471146, and 61102037.

References

  1. 1.
    Bioucas-Dias, J.M., Figueiredo, M.A.: A new TwIST: two-step iterative shrinkage/thresholding algorithms for image restoration. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 16(12), 2992–3004 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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. 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. 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
  5. 5.
    Candes, E.J., Plan, Y.: Matrix completion with noise. Proc. IEEE 98(6), 925–936 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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
  7. 7.
    Dabov, K., Foi, A., Katkovnik, V., Egiazarian, K.: Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 16(8), 2080–2095 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Daubechies, I., Defrise, M., De Mol, C.: An iterative thresholding algorithm for linear inverse problems with a sparsity constraint. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 57(11), 1413–1457 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dong, W., Shi, G., Li, X.: Nonlocal image restoration with bilateral variance estimation: a low-rank approach. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 22(2), 700–711 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dong, W., Shi, G., Li, X., Ma, Y., Huang, F.: Compressive sensing via nonlocal low-rank regularization. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23(8), 3618–3632 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dong, W., Zhang, L., Shi, G., Li, X.: Nonlocally centralized sparse representation for image restoration. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 22(4), 1620–1630 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elad, M., Aharon, M.: Image denoising via sparse and redundant representations over learned dictionaries. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 15(12), 3736–3745 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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
  14. 14.
    Hel-Or, Y., Shaked, D.: A discriminative approach for wavelet denoising. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 17(4), 443–457 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Katkovnik, V., Foi, A., Egiazarian, K., Astola, J.: From local kernel to nonlocal multiple-model image denoising. Int. J. Comput. Vis. 86(1), 1–32 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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. 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
  18. 18.
    Portilla, J., Strela, V., Wainwright, M.J., Simoncelli, E.P.: Image denoising using scale mixtures of Gaussians in the wavelet domain. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 12(11), 1338–1351 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rajwade, A., Rangarajan, A., Banerjee, A.: Image denoising using the higher order singular value decomposition. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 35(4), 849–862 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rudin, L.I., Osher, S., Fatemi, E.: Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algorithms. Phys. D 60(1), 259–268 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 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. 22.
    Srebro, N., Jaakkola, T., et al.: Weighted low-rank approximations. In: ICML, vol. 3, pp. 720–727 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 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
  24. 24.
    Zhang, X., Burger, M., Bresson, X., Osher, S.: Bregmanized nonlocal regularization for deconvolution and sparse reconstruction. SIAM J. Imaging Sci. 3(3), 253–276 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zibulevsky, M., Elad, M.: L1–L2 optimization in signal and image processing. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 27(3), 76–88 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Feng Pan
    • 1
  • Zifei Yan
    • 1
  • Kai Zhang
    • 1
  • Hongzhi Zhang
    • 1
  • Wangmeng Zuo
    • 1
  1. 1.Harbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations