Effective Denoising with Non-local Means Filter for Reliable Unwrapping of Digital Holographic Interferometric Fringes

  • P. L. Aparna
  • Rahul G. Waghmare
  • Deepak Mishra
  • R. K. Sai Subrahmanyam Gorthi
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 703)


Estimation of phase from the complex interference field has become an emerging area of research for last few decades. The phase values obtained by using arctan function are limited to the interval \((-\pi , \pi ]\). Such phase map is known as wrapped phase. The unwrapping process, which produces continuous phase map from the wrapped phase, becomes tedious in presence of noise. In this paper, we propose a preprocessing technique that removes the noise from the interference field, thereby improving the performance of naive unwrapping algorithms. For de-noising of the complex field, real part and imaginary parts of the field are processed separately. Real-valued images (real and imaginary parts) are processed using non-local means filter with non-Euclidian distance measure. The de-noised real and imaginary parts are then combined to form a clean interference field. MATLAB’s unwrap function is used as unwrapping algorithm to get the continuous phase from the cleaned interference field. Comparison with the Frost’s filter validates the applicability of proposed approach for processing the noisy interference field.


Holographic interferometry Non-local means Non-Euclidian distance Phase unwrapping Image de-noising 


  1. 1.
    Gorthi, Sai Siva and Rastogi, Pramod, “Fringe projection techniques: Whither we are?,” Opt. Laser. Eng., 48, 133–140, (2010).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. R. Sukumar, R. G. Waghmare, R. K. Singh, G. R. K. S. Subrahmanyam and D. Mishra, “Phase unwrapping with Kalman filter based denoising in digital holographic interferometry,” Adv. in Computing, Communications and Informatics, 2256–2260, (2015).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Takeda and H. Ina and S. Kobayashi, “Fourier-transform method of fringe-pattern analysis for computer-based topography and inteferometry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 43(1), 156–160, (1982).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kemao Qian, “Windowed Fourier transform for fringe pattern analysis,” Appl. opt., 43(13), 2695–2702, (2004).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. R. Watkins and S. M. Tan and T. H. Barnes, “Determination of interferometer phase distributions by use of wavelets,” Opt. Lett., 24(13), 905–907, (1999).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. S. Lee, “Digital image enhancement and noise filtering by use of local statistics,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 2(2), 165–168, (1980).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    V. S. Frost, J. A. Stiles, K. S. Shanmugan, and J. C. Holtzman, “A model for radar images and its application to adaptive digital filtering of multiplicative noise,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 4(2), 157–166, (1982).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Francisco Palacios, Edison Gonalves, Jorge Ricardo, Jose L Valin, “Adaptive filter to improve the performance of phase-unwrapping in digital holography”, Opt. Commun., 238(46), 245–251, (2004).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goldstein, Richard M and Zebker, Howard A and Werner, Charles L, “Satellite radar interferometry: Two-dimensional phase unwrapping,” Radio Science, 23(4), 713–720, (1988).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huang MJ, Sheu W, “Histogram-data-orientated filter for inconsistency removal of interferometric phase maps,” Opt. Eng., 44(4), 45602(1–11), (2005).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yongguo Li, Jianqiang Zhu, Weixing Shen, “Phase unwrapping algorithms, respectively, based on path-following and discrete cosine transform,” Optik, 119(11), 545–547, (2008).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Zappa, G. Busca, “Comparison of eight unwrapping algorithms applied to Fourier-transform profilometry,” Opt. Laser. Eng., 46(2), 106–116, (2008).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. T. Kuan, A. A. Sawchuk, T. C. Strand, and P. Chavel, “Adaptive noise smoothing filter for images with signal dependent noise,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 7(2), 165–177, (1985).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Lopes, R. Touzi, and E. Nezzy, “Adaptive speckle filters and scene heterogeneity,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 28(6), 992–1000, (1990).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deledalle, Charles-Alban, Loc Denis, and Florence Tupin, “Iterative weighted maximum likelihood denoising with probabilistic patch-based weights” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 18(12), 2661–2672, (2009).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sai Siva Gorthi and Pramod Rastogi, “piece-wise polynomial phase approximation approach for the analysis of reconstructed interference fields in digital holographic interferometry,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt., 11, 1–6 (2009).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. G. Waghmare, D. Mishra, G. Sai Subrahmanyam, E. Banoth, and S. S. Gorthi, “Signal tracking approach for phase estimation in digital holographic interferometry,” Applied optics, 53(19), 4150–4157, (2014).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. L. Aparna
    • 1
  • Rahul G. Waghmare
    • 2
  • Deepak Mishra
    • 2
  • R. K. Sai Subrahmanyam Gorthi
    • 3
  1. 1.National Institute of TechnologySurathkalIndia
  2. 2.Indian Institute of Space Science and TechnologyTrivandrumIndia
  3. 3.Indian Institute of TechnologyTirupatiIndia

Personalised recommendations