Converting an image into a vector of pixels - python

I am trying to convert an image into an array of pixels.
Here is my current code.
im = Image.open("beeleg.png")
pixels = im.load()
im.getdata() # doesn't work
print(pixels # doesn't work
Ideally, my end goal is to convert the image into a vector of just pixels, so for instance if I have an image of dimensions 100x100, then I want a vector of dimensions 1x10000, where each value is between [0, 255]. Then, divide each of the values in the array by 256 and add a bias of 1 in the front of the vector. However, I am not able to proceed with all this without being able to obtain an array. How to proceed?

Scipy's ndimage library is generally the go-to library for working with pixels as data (arrays). You can load an image from file (most common formats supported) using scipy.ndimage.imread into a numpy array which can be easily reshaped and mathematically operated on. The mode keyword can be used to specify a colorspace transformation upon load (convert an RGB image to black and white). In your case you asked for single color pixels from 0-255 (8bit grayscale) so you would use mode='L'. See The Documentation for usage / more useful functions.

If use OpenCV, gray=cv2.imread(image,0) will return a grayscale image with n rows x m cols single channel numpy array. rows, cols = gray.shape will return the height and width of the image.

Related

How to edit pixels via PIL with a 1D array [0:255]

Using the following code, PIL easily returns an array of single pixel values from an image. Not sure what the term for it is; but instead of a 3d array (RGB), it simplifies each pixel into one of 256 values.
from PIL import Image
im = Image.open(image_path, 'r')
pixel_values = list(im.getdata())
The question is, how can I edit pixels on an image with this same method? I believe the default arg for the putpixel method expects a 3d array (RGB), and if I only give one value; it only ranges over shades of black.
im.putpixel((x, y), value)
im.show()
I would like to be able to substitute integers (0-255) in for value and have access to the wider spectrum of discrete colors.
Is this possible? Seems like it should already be a built in method.

How to make pixels arrays from RGB image without losing its spatial information in python?

I am wondering is there any workaround to convert RGB images to pixel vectors without losing its spatial information in python. As far as I know, I can read the images and do transformation for images to pixel vectors. I am not sure doing this way still preserve images' spatial information in pixel vectors. How can I make this happen for making pixel vectors from RGB image?
my attempt:
I tried as follow but I am not sure how to make
import matplotlib.pyplot as pl
image = plt.imread('dog.jpg')
im = image/255.0
print(im.shape) #(32, 32, 3)
pixels = im.reshape(im.shape[0]*im.shape[1], im.shape[2])
but I want to make sure how to make pixel vectors from RGB images without losing pixel order and its spatial information. How to make this happen? any thoughts?
I think maybe numpy might have functions to do this. Can anyone point me how to do this with numpy?
graphic illustration:
here is simple graphic illustration of making pixel vectors from RGB images:
as this diagram shows, we have RGB images with shape of (4,4,3) which needs to make pixel vectors without losing its spatial information and pixel orders then combine pixel vectors from each channel (Red, Green, Blue) as pixel matrix or dataframe. I am curious how to get this done in python?
goal:
I want to make pixel vectors from RGB images so resulted pixel vectors needs to be expanded with taylor expansion. Can anyone point me out how to make this happen?
Are You just trying to reshape each channel to a vector and then joining them horizontally? That's what I understood from the graphic illustration and the way i would do it is something like this:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
image = plt.imread('monkey.png')
image = image / 255.0
red = image[:,:,0]
green = image[:,:,1]
blue = image[:,:,2]
def to_vector(matrix):
result = []
for i in range(matrix.shape[1]):
result = np.vstack(matrix[:,i])
return result
red = to_vector(red)
green = to_vector(green)
blue = to_vector(blue)
vector = np.hstack((red,green,blue))
Your original attempt was almost a full solution - maybe actually a full solution, depending on what the idea is.
print(im.shape) #(32, 32, 3)
pixels = im.reshape(im.shape[0]*im.shape[1], im.shape[2]) # this is exactly correct
print(pixels.shape) #(1024,3)
reds = pixels[:, 0] #just as an example for where things end up in the result
pixels_channelfirst = np.moveaxis(pixels, 1, 0) # if you want the first axis to be channels
print(pixels.shape) #(3, 1024)
reds = pixels[0, :]
"I want to preserve its pixel order and spatial information" - this does that already! Add one non-zero pixel to a zero image and plot where it goes, if you have doubts. np.hstack in the other answer does as well.

greyscale image to 3 channels

I have code that looks like this
from skimage import io as sio
test_image = imread('/home/username/pat/file.png')
test_image = skimage.transform.resize(test_image, (IMG_HEIGHT, IMG_WIDTH), mode='constant', preserve_range=True)
print test_image.shape # prints (128,128)
print test_image.max(), test_image.min() # prints 65535.0 0.0
sio.imshow(test_image)
More importantly, I need to make this image be in 3 channels, so I can feed it into a neural network that expects such input, any idea how to do that?
I want to transform a 1-channel image into a 3-channel image that looks reasonable when I plot it, makes sense, etc. How?
I tried padding with 0s, I tried copying the same values 3 times for the 3 channels, but then when I try to display the image, it looks like gibberish. So how can I transform the image into 3 channels, even if it becomes something like, bluescale instead of greyscale, but still be able to visualize it in a meaningful way?
Edit:
if I try
test_image = skimage.color.gray2rgb(test_image)
I get all white image, with some black dots.
I get the same all white, rare small black dots if I try
convert Test1_PC_1.tif -colorspace sRGB -type truecolor Test1_PC_1_new.tif
Before the attempted transform with gray2rgb
print type(test_image[0,0])
<type 'numpy.uint16'>
After
print type(test_image[0,0,0])
<type 'numpy.float64'>
You need to convert the array from 2D to 3D, where the third dimension is the color.
You can use the gray2rgb function function provided by skimage:
test_image = skimage.color.gray2rgb(test_image)
Alternatively, you can write your own conversion -- which gives you some flexibility to tweak the pixel values:
# basic conversion from gray to RGB encoding
test_image = np.array([[[s,s,s] for s in r] for r in test_image],dtype="u1")
# conversion from gray to RGB encoding -- putting the image in the green channel
test_image = np.array([[[0,s,0] for s in r] for r in test_image],dtype="u1")
I notice from your max() value, that you're using 16-bit sample values (which is uncommon). You'll want a different dtype, maybe "u16" or "int32". Also, you may need to play some games to make the image display with the correct polarity (it may appear with black/white reversed).
One way to get there is to just invert all of the pixel values:
test_image = 65535-test_image ## invert 16-bit pixels
Or you could look into the norm parameter to imshow, which appears to have an inverse function.
Your conversion from gray-value to RGB by replicating the gray-value three times such that R==G==B is correct.
The strange displayed result is likely caused by assumptions made during display. You will need to scale your data before display to fix it.
Usually, a uint8 image has values 0-255, which are mapped to min-max scale of display. Uint16 has values 0-65535, with 65535 mapped to max. Floating-point images are very often assumed to be in the range 0-1, with 1 mapped to max. Any larger value will then also be mapped to max. This is why you see so much white in your output image.
If you divide each output sample by the maximum value in your image you’ll be able to display it properly.
Well, imshow is using by default, a kind of heatmap to display the image intensities. To display a grayscale image just specify the colormap as above:
plt.imshow(image, cmap="gray")
Now, i think you can get the channel of an image by doing:
image[:,:,i] where i is in {0,1,2}
To extract an image for a specific channel:
red_image = image.copy()
red_image[:,:,1] = 0
red_image[:,:,2] = 0
Edit:
Do you definitely have to use skimage? What about python-opencv module?
Have you tried the following example?
import cv2
import cv
color_img = cv2.cvtColor(gray_img, cv.CV_GRAY2RGB)

FFT on image with Python

I have a problem with FFT implementation in Python. I have completely strange results.
Ok so, I want to open image, get value of every pixel in RGB, then I need to use fft on it, and convert to image again.
My steps:
1) I'm opening image with PIL library in Python like this
from PIL import Image
im = Image.open("test.png")
2) I'm getting pixels
pixels = list(im.getdata())
3) I'm seperate every pixel to r,g,b values
for x in range(width):
for y in range(height):
r,g,b = pixels[x*width+y]
red[x][y] = r
green[x][y] = g
blue[x][y] = b
4). Let's assume that I have one pixel (111,111,111). And use fft on all red values like this
red = np.fft.fft(red)
And then:
print (red[0][0], green[0][0], blue[0][0])
My output is:
(53866+0j) 111 111
It's completely wrong I think. My image is 64x64, and FFT from gimp is completely different. Actually, my FFT give me only arrays with huge values, thats why my output image is black.
Do you have any idea where is problem?
[EDIT]
I've changed as suggested to
red= np.fft.fft2(red)
And after that I scale it
scale = 1/(width*height)
red= abs(red* scale)
And still, I'm getting only black image.
[EDIT2]
Ok, so lets take one image.
Assume that I dont want to open it and save as greyscale image. So I'm doing like this.
def getGray(pixel):
r,g,b = pixel
return (r+g+b)/3
im = Image.open("test.png")
im.load()
pixels = list(im.getdata())
width, height = im.size
for x in range(width):
for y in range(height):
greyscale[x][y] = getGray(pixels[x*width+y])
data = []
for x in range(width):
for y in range(height):
pix = greyscale[x][y]
data.append(pix)
img = Image.new("L", (width,height), "white")
img.putdata(data)
img.save('out.png')
After this, I'm getting this image , which is ok. So now, I want to make fft on my image before I'll save it to new one, so I'm doing like this
scale = 1/(width*height)
greyscale = np.fft.fft2(greyscale)
greyscale = abs(greyscale * scale)
after loading it. After saving it to file, I have . So lets try now open test.png with gimp and use FFT filter plugin. I'm getting this image, which is correct
How I can handle it?
Great question. I’ve never heard of it but the Gimp Fourier plugin seems really neat:
A simple plug-in to do fourier transform on you image. The major advantage of this plugin is to be able to work with the transformed image inside GIMP. You can so draw or apply filters in fourier space, and get the modified image with an inverse FFT.
This idea—of doing Gimp-style manipulation on frequency-domain data and transforming back to an image—is very cool! Despite years of working with FFTs, I’ve never thought about doing this. Instead of messing with Gimp plugins and C executables and ugliness, let’s do this in Python!
Caveat. I experimented with a number of ways to do this, attempting to get something close to the output Gimp Fourier image (gray with moiré pattern) from the original input image, but I simply couldn’t. The Gimp image appears to be somewhat symmetric around the middle of the image, but it’s not flipped vertically or horizontally, nor is it transpose-symmetric. I’d expect the plugin to be using a real 2D FFT to transform an H×W image into a H×W array of real-valued data in the frequency domain, in which case there would be no symmetry (it’s just the to-complex FFT that’s conjugate-symmetric for real-valued inputs like images). So I gave up trying to reverse-engineer what the Gimp plugin is doing and looked at how I’d do this from scratch.
The code. Very simple: read an image, apply scipy.fftpack.rfft in the leading two dimensions to get the “frequency-image”, rescale to 0–255, and save.
Note how this is different from the other answers! No grayscaling—the 2D real-to-real FFT happens independently on all three channels. No abs needed: the frequency-domain image can legitimately have negative values, and if you make them positive, you can’t recover your original image. (Also a nice feature: no compromises on image size. The size of the array remains the same before and after the FFT, whether the width/height is even or odd.)
from PIL import Image
import numpy as np
import scipy.fftpack as fp
## Functions to go from image to frequency-image and back
im2freq = lambda data: fp.rfft(fp.rfft(data, axis=0),
axis=1)
freq2im = lambda f: fp.irfft(fp.irfft(f, axis=1),
axis=0)
## Read in data file and transform
data = np.array(Image.open('test.png'))
freq = im2freq(data)
back = freq2im(freq)
# Make sure the forward and backward transforms work!
assert(np.allclose(data, back))
## Helper functions to rescale a frequency-image to [0, 255] and save
remmax = lambda x: x/x.max()
remmin = lambda x: x - np.amin(x, axis=(0,1), keepdims=True)
touint8 = lambda x: (remmax(remmin(x))*(256-1e-4)).astype(int)
def arr2im(data, fname):
out = Image.new('RGB', data.shape[1::-1])
out.putdata(map(tuple, data.reshape(-1, 3)))
out.save(fname)
arr2im(touint8(freq), 'freq.png')
(Aside: FFT-lover geek note. Look at the documentation for rfft for details, but I used Scipy’s FFTPACK module because its rfft interleaves real and imaginary components of a single pixel as two adjacent real values, guaranteeing that the output for any-sized 2D image (even vs odd, width vs height) will be preserved. This is in contrast to Numpy’s numpy.fft.rfft2 which, because it returns complex data of size width/2+1 by height/2+1, forces you to deal with one extra row/column and deal with deinterleaving complex-to-real yourself. Who needs that hassle for this application.)
Results. Given input named test.png:
this snippet produces the following output (global min/max have been rescaled and quantized to 0-255):
And upscaled:
In this frequency-image, the DC (0 Hz frequency) component is in the top-left, and frequencies move higher as you go right and down.
Now, let’s see what happens when you manipulate this image in a couple of ways. Instead of this test image, let’s use a cat photo.
I made a few mask images in Gimp that I then load into Python and multiply the frequency-image with to see what effect the mask has on the image.
Here’s the code:
# Make frequency-image of cat photo
freq = im2freq(np.array(Image.open('cat.jpg')))
# Load three frequency-domain masks (DSP "filters")
bpfMask = np.array(Image.open('cat-mask-bpfcorner.png')).astype(float) / 255
hpfMask = np.array(Image.open('cat-mask-hpfcorner.png')).astype(float) / 255
lpfMask = np.array(Image.open('cat-mask-corner.png')).astype(float) / 255
# Apply each filter and save the output
arr2im(touint8(freq2im(freq * bpfMask)), 'cat-bpf.png')
arr2im(touint8(freq2im(freq * hpfMask)), 'cat-hpf.png')
arr2im(touint8(freq2im(freq * lpfMask)), 'cat-lpf.png')
Here’s a low-pass filter mask on the left, and on the right, the result—click to see the full-res image:
In the mask, black = 0.0, white = 1.0. So the lowest frequencies are kept here (white), while the high ones are blocked (black). This blurs the image by attenuating high frequencies. Low-pass filters are used all over the place, including when decimating (“downsampling”) an image (though they will be shaped much more carefully than me drawing in Gimp 😜).
Here’s a band-pass filter, where the lowest frequencies (see that bit of white in the top-left corner?) and high frequencies are kept, but the middling-frequencies are blocked. Quite bizarre!
Here’s a high-pass filter, where the top-left corner that was left white in the above mask is blacked out:
This is how edge-detection works.
Postscript. Someone, make a webapp using this technique that lets you draw masks and apply them to an image real-time!!!
There are several issues here.
1) Manual conversion to grayscale isn't good. Use Image.open("test.png").convert('L')
2) Most likely there is an issue with types. You shouldn't pass np.ndarray from fft2 to a PIL image without being sure their types are compatible. abs(np.fft.fft2(something)) will return you an array of type np.float32 or something like this, whereas PIL image is going to receive something like an array of type np.uint8.
3) Scaling suggested in the comments looks wrong. You actually need your values to fit into 0..255 range.
Here's my code that addresses these 3 points:
import numpy as np
from PIL import Image
def fft(channel):
fft = np.fft.fft2(channel)
fft *= 255.0 / fft.max() # proper scaling into 0..255 range
return np.absolute(fft)
input_image = Image.open("test.png")
channels = input_image.split() # splits an image into R, G, B channels
result_array = np.zeros_like(input_image) # make sure data types,
# sizes and numbers of channels of input and output numpy arrays are the save
if len(channels) > 1: # grayscale images have only one channel
for i, channel in enumerate(channels):
result_array[..., i] = fft(channel)
else:
result_array[...] = fft(channels[0])
result_image = Image.fromarray(result_array)
result_image.save('out.png')
I must admit I haven't managed to get results identical to the GIMP FFT plugin. As far as I see it does some post-processing. My results are all kinda very low contrast mess, and GIMP seems to overcome this by tuning contrast and scaling down non-informative channels (in your case all chanels except Red are just empty). Refer to the image:

Python - get white pixels of image

I'm would like to go from an image filename to a list of coordinates of the white pixels in the image.
I know it involves PIL. I have tried using Image.load() but this doesn't help because the output is not indexable (to use in a for loop).
You can dump an image as a numpy array and manipulate the pixel values that way.
from PIL import Image
import numpy as np
im=Image.open("someimage.png")
pixels=np.asarray(im.getdata())
npixels,bpp=pixels.shape
This will give you an array whose dimensions will depend on how many bands you have per pixel (bpp above) and the number of rows times the number of columns in the image -- shape will give you the size of the resulting array. Once you have the pixel values, it ought to be straightforward to filter out those whose values are 255
To convert a numpy array back to an image use:
im=Image.fromarray(pixels)

Categories

Resources