)
Image Restoration
Spring ’04 Instructor: Min Wu
ECE Department, Univ. of Maryland, College Park
www.ajconline.umd.edu (select ENEE631 S’04)
minwu@eng.umd.edu
Based on ENEE631 Spring’04
Section 7
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [4]
From Matlab ImageToolbox
Documentation pp124
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [5]
Imperfectness in Image Capturing
Blurring ~ linear spatialinvariant filter model w/ additive noise
Impulse response h(n
1
, n
2
) & H(e
1
, e
2
)
– Point Spread Function (PSF) ~ positive I/O
– [No blur] h(n
1
, n
2
) = o(n
1
, n
2
)
– [Linear translational motion blur]
local average along motion direction
– [Uniform outoffocus blur]
local average in a circular neighborhood
– Atomspheric turbulence blur, etc.
H
u(n
1
, n
2
) v(n
1
, n
2
)
N(n
1
, n
2
)
¦
¦
¦
¹
¦
¦
¦
´
¦
÷ =
s +
=
otherwise 0
tan and
x if
L
1
) , ; , ( y
x
2
2 2


L
y
L y x h
¦
¹
¦
´
¦
s +
=
otherwise 0
x if
R
1
) ; , (
2 2 2
2
R y
R y x h
t
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [6]
Fourier Transform of PSF for Common Distortions
From Bovik’s Handbook
Sec.3.5 Fig.2&3 UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.Wu © 2001)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [7]
Undo Linear SpatialInvariant Distortion
Assume noiseless and PSF of distortion h(n
1
, n
2
) is known
Restoration by Deconvolution / InverseFiltering
– Often used for deblurring
– Want to find g(n
1
, n
2
) satisfies h(n
1
, n
2
) © g(n
1
, n
2
) = o(n
1
, n
2
)
EE h(k
1
, k
2
) g(n
1
k
1
, n
2
k
2
) = o(n
1
, n
2
) for all n
1
, n
2
– Easy to solve in spectrum domain
Convolution Multiplication
H(e
1
, e
2
) G(e
1
, e
2
) = 1
Interpretation: choose G to compensate distortions from H
) , (
1
) , (
2 1
2 1
e e
e e
H
G =
H
u(n
1
, n
2
) v(n
1
, n
2
)
q(n
1
, n
2
)=0
G
u’(n
1
, n
2
) w(n
1
, n
2
)
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [8]
Problems With Inverse Filtering Under Noise
Zeros in H(e
1
, e
2
)
– Interpretation: distortion by H removes all info. in those freq.
– Inverse filter tries to “compensate” by assigning infinite gains
– Amplifies noise:
W(e
1
, e
2
) = H (e
1
, e
2
) U (e
1
, e
2
)
U’ (e
1
, e
2
) = (W+N) / H ~ N/H if W=0
Solutions?
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [9]
Examples of Inverse & Pseudoinverse Filtering
From Jain Fig.8.10
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [10]
Problems With Inverse Filtering Under Noise
Zeros in H(e
1
, e
2
)
– Interpretation: distortion by H removes all info. in those freq.
– Inverse filter tries to “compensate” by assigning infinite gains
– Amplifies noise:
W(e
1
, e
2
) = H (e
1
, e
2
) U (e
1
, e
2
)
U’ (e
1
, e
2
) = (W+N) / H ~ N/H if W=0
Solutions ~ Pseudoinverse Filtering
– Assign zero gain for G at spectrum nulls of H
– Interpretation: not bother to make impossible compensations
¦
¹
¦
´
¦
<
>
=
c e e
c e e
e e e e
 ) , ( H  if , 0
 ) , ( H  if ,
) , (
1
) , (
2 1
2 1
2 1 2 1
H G
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [11]
Handling Spectrum Nulls Via HighFreq Cutoff
Limit the restoration
to lower frequency
components to avoid
amplifying noise at
spectrum nulls
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
4
)
Figure is from slides at Gonzalez/ Woods DIP book website (Chapter 5)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [12]
Handling Noise in Deconvolution
Inverse filtering is sensitive to noise
– Does not explicitly modeling and handling noise
Try to balance between deblurring vs. noise suppression
– Minimize MSE between the original and restored
e = E{ [ u(n
1
, n
2
) – u’(n
1
, n
2
) ]
2
} where u’(n
1
, n
2
) is a func. of {v(m
1
, m
2
) }
– Best estimate is conditional mean E[ u(n
1
, n
2
)  all v(m
1
, m
2
) ]
usually difficult to solve for general restoration (need conditional
probability distribution, and estimation is nonlinear in general)
Get the best linear estimate instead Wiener filtering
– Consider the (desired) image and noise as random fields
– Produce a linear estimate from the observed image to minimize MSE
H
u(n
1
, n
2
) v(n
1
, n
2
)
q(n
1
, n
2
)
G
u’(n
1
, n
2
) w(n
1
, n
2
)
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
/
2
0
0
4
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [13]
Wiener Filtering
Get the best linear estimate minimizing MSE
– Assume spatialinvariant filter u’(n
1
, n
2
) = g (n
1
, n
2
)© v(n
1
, n
2
)
– Assume widesense stationarity for original signal and noise
– Assume noise is zeromean and uncorrelated with original signal
Solutions
– Bring into orthogonal condition
E{ [ u(n
1
, n
2
) – u’(n
1
, n
2
) ] v(m
1
, m
2
) }=0
– Represent in correlation functions: R
uv
(k,l) = g(k,l) © R
vv
(k,l)
– Take DFT to get representation in power spectrum density
) , (
) , (
) , (
2 1
2 1
2 1
e e
e e
e e
vv
uv
S
S
G =
¦
¹
¦
´
¦
=
+ =
) , ( ) , ( ) , (
) , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , ( : Note
2 1 2 1
*
2 1
2 1 2 1
2
2 1 2 1
e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e
qq
uu uv
uu vv
S H S
S S H S
) , ( ) , ( ) , (
) , ( ) , (
2 1 2 1
2
2 1
2 1 2 1
*
e e e e e e
e e e e
qq
S S H
S H
uu
uu
+
= U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [14]
More on Wiener Filtering
Balancing between two jobs
for deblurring noisy image
– HPF filter for deblurring
(undo H distortion)
– LPF for suppressing noise
Noiseless case ~ Sqq = 0 (inverse filter)
– Wiener filter becomes pseudoinverse filter for S
qq
÷ 0
Noblur case ~ H = 1 (Wiener Smoothing Filter)
– Zerophase filter to attenuate noise according to SNR at each freq.
¦
¹
¦
´
¦
=
=
=
+
=
÷ ÷
0  ) , ( H  if , 0
0  ) , ( H  if ,
) , (
1
/  
) , (
2 1
2 1
2 1 0
2
*
0 2 1
e e
e e
e e e e
qq qq
qq
H
S S H
H
G
S
uv
S
uu
S H
S
H
G
*
wiener 2 1
1
) , (
qq
e e
+
=
1 ) , (
) , (
) , ( ) , (
) , (
) , (
2 1
2 1
2 1 2 1
2 1
1 wiener 2 1
+
=
+
=
=
e e
e e
e e e e
e e
e e
qq SNR
SNR
uu
uu
H
S
S
S S
S
G
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [15]
Comparisons
From Jain Fig.8.11
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [16]
Example: Wiener Filtering vs. Inverse Filtering
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
4
)
Figure is from slides at Gonzalez/ Woods DIP book website (Chapter 5)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [17]
Example (2):
Wiener Filtering
vs.
Inverse Filtering
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
4
)
Figure is from slides at Gonzalez/ Woods
DIP book website (Chapter 5)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [18]
To Explore Further
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
4
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [19]
Review: Handling Noise in Deconvolution
Inverse filtering is sensitive to noise
– Does not explicitly modeling and handling noise
Try to balance between deblurring vs. noise suppression
– Consider the (desired) image and noise as random fields
– Minimize MSE between the original and restored
e = E{ [ u(n
1
, n
2
) – u’(n
1
, n
2
) ]
2
} where u’(n
1
, n
2
) is a func. of {v(m
1
, m
2
) }
– Best estimate is conditional mean E[ u(n
1
, n
2
)  all v(m
1
, m
2
) ]
Get the best linear estimate Wiener filtering
– Produce a linear estimate from the observed image to minimize MSE
H
u(n
1
, n
2
) v(n
1
, n
2
)
q(n
1
, n
2
)
G
u’(n
1
, n
2
) w(n
1
, n
2
)
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
/
2
0
0
4
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [20]
Wiener Filter: From Theory to Practice
Recall: assumed p.s.d. of image & noise random fields and
freq. response of distortion filter are known
Why make the assumptions?
Are these reasonable assumptions?
What do they imply in our implementation of Wiener filter?
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
4
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [21]
Wiener Filter: Issues to Be Addressed
Wiener filter’s size
– Theoretically has infinite impulse response ~ require largesize DFTs
– Impose filter size constraint: find the best FIR that minimizes MSE
Need to estimate power spectrum density of orig. signal
– Estimate p.s.d. of blurred image v and compensate variance due to noise
– Estimate p.s.d. from a set of representative images similar to the images
to be restored
– Or use statistical model for the orig. image and estimate parameters
– Constrained least square filter ~ see Jain’s Sec.8.8 & Gonzalez Sec.5.9
Optimize smoothness in restored image (leastsquare of the rough
transitions)
Constrain differences between blurred image and blurred version of
reconstructed image
Estimate the restoration filter w/o the need of estimating p.s.d.
Unknown distortion H ~ Blind Deconvolution
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [24]
Basic Ideas of Blind Deconvolution
Three ways to estimate H: observation, experimentation, math. modeling
Estimate H via spectrum’s zero patterns
– Two major classes of blur (motion blur and outoffocus)
– H has nulls related to the type and the parameters of the blur
MaximumLikelihood blur estimation
– Each set of image model and blur parameters gives a “typical” blurred
output; Probability comes into picture because of the existence of noise
– Given the observation of blurred image, try to find the set of parameters that
is most likely to produce that blurred output
Iteration ~ ExpectationMaximization approach (EM)
Given estimated parameters, restore image via Wiener filtering
Examine restored image and refine parameter estimation
Get local optimums
To explore more: Bovik’s Handbook Sec.3.5 (subsection4, pp136)
“Blind Image Deconvolution” by Kundur et al, IEEE Sig. Proc. Magazine, vol.13, 1996
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
/
2
0
0
4
)
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [25]
Filtering Through Transform Domain Operation
E.g.1 Realize Wiener in DFT domain
E.g.2 Use zonal mask in transform domain
– Realize “ideal” LPF/BPF/HPF
– Computation complexity for transform could be high for large image
From Jain Fig.7.31&7.32
U
M
C
P
E
N
E
E
6
3
1
S
l
i
d
e
s
(
c
r
e
a
t
e
d
b
y
M
.
W
u
©
2
0
0
1
)
UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.Wu © 2001)
From Matlab ImageToolbox Documentation pp124
ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [4]
y. n2) & H(1.Imperfectness in Image Capturing u(n1. R) R 0 otherwise Lec8 – Image Restoration [5] .Wu © 2001) v(n1. ) 0 otherw ise – [Uniform outoffocus blur] – Atomspheric turbulence blur. 2) – Point Spread Function (PSF) ~ positive I/O – [No blur] h(n1. n2 ) H N(n1. n2) – [Linear translational motion blur] local average along motion direction local average in a circular neighborhood 1 if x 2 y 2 L 2 L and x y tan h ( x. y. etc. L. n2) = (n1. ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) 1 2 2 2 2 if x y R h( x. n2 ) Blurring ~ linear spatialinvariant filter model w/ additive noise Impulse response h(n1. n2 ) UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.
Wu © 2001) From Bovik’s Handbook Sec.5 Fig.2&3 Lec8 – Image Restoration [6] ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) .Fourier Transform of PSF for Common Distortions UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.3.
n2) = (n1. n2) w(n1. n2) satisfies h(n1. 2) G(1. n2k2) = (n1. n2) h(k1. n2) u’(n1. n2) is known u(n1. 2 ) H (1 . n2 – Easy to solve in spectrum domain Convolution Multiplication H(1.Wu © 2001) Assume noiseless and PSF of distortion h(n1. 2) = 1 Interpretation: choose G to compensate distortions from H 1 G (1 .Undo Linear SpatialInvariant Distortion UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. 2 ) ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [7] . k2) g(n1 k1. n2) for all n1. n2) v(n1. n2) H (n1. n2)=0 G Restoration by Deconvolution / InverseFiltering – Often used for deblurring – Want to find g(n1. n2) g(n1.
2) U (1. in those freq. 2) = H (1.Problems With Inverse Filtering Under Noise UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. 2) = (W+N) / H N/H if W=0 Solutions? ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [8] . – Inverse filter tries to “compensate” by assigning infinite gains – Amplifies noise: W(1. 2) – Interpretation: distortion by H removes all info.Wu © 2001) Zeros in H(1. 2) U’ (1.
8.10 Lec8 – Image Restoration [9] ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) .Wu © 2001) From Jain Fig.Examples of Inverse & Pseudoinverse Filtering UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.
2) U’ (1. 2) – Interpretation: distortion by H removes all info. 2 )  ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [10] . 2 )  G (1 . if  H(1 . 2 ) H (1 . in those freq. – Inverse filter tries to “compensate” by assigning infinite gains – Amplifies noise: W(1. 2) U (1. 2) = H (1. 2) = (W+N) / H N/H if W=0 Solutions ~ Pseudoinverse Filtering – Assign zero gain for G at spectrum nulls of H – Interpretation: not bother to make impossible compensations 1 .Wu © 2001) Zeros in H(1. if  H(1 .Problems With Inverse Filtering Under Noise UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. 2 ) 0.
Wu © 2004) Limit the restoration to lower frequency components to avoid amplifying noise at spectrum nulls Figure is from slides at Gonzalez/ Woods DIP book website (Chapter 5) ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [11] .Handling Spectrum Nulls Via HighFreq Cutoff UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.
Wu © 2001/2004) Inverse filtering is sensitive to noise – Does not explicitly modeling and handling noise Try to balance between deblurring vs. n2) v(n1. n2)  all v(m1 .Handling Noise in Deconvolution UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. n2) – u’(n1. m2) ] usually difficult to solve for general restoration (need conditional probability distribution. noise suppression – Minimize MSE between the original and restored e = E{ [ u(n1. m2) } – Best estimate is conditional mean E[ u(n1 . of {v(m1. n2) u’(n1. n2) H (n1. n2) w(n1. n2) is a func. and estimation is nonlinear in general) Get the best linear estimate instead Wiener filtering – Consider the (desired) image and noise as random fields – Produce a linear estimate from the observed image to minimize MSE u(n1. n2) ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) G Lec8 – Image Restoration [12] . n2) ] 2 } where u’(n1.
2 ) S vv (1 . 2 ) Suu (1 .Wu © 2001) Get the best linear estimate minimizing MSE – Assume spatialinvariant filter u’(n1. 2 ) G (1 . 2 ) 2 H (1 .l) – Take DFT to get representation in power spectrum density Suv (1 . n2) ] v(m1. 2 ) H * (1 . 2 ) H * (1 . n2) – Assume widesense stationarity for original signal and noise – Assume noise is zeromean and uncorrelated with original signal Solutions – Bring into orthogonal condition E{ [ u(n1. 2 ) Suu (1 . n2) – u’(n1.l) = g(k. 2 ) 2 Note : Svv (1 .Wiener Filtering UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. n2) v(n1. 2 ) H (1 . 2 ) S (1 . m2) }=0 – Represent in correlation functions: Ruv(k. 2 ) Suv (1 . 2 ) Suu (1 . 2 ) ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [13] . 2 ) Suu (1 .l) Rvv(k. 2 ) S (1 . n2) = g (n1.
2 )  0 H (1 . 2 ) wiener H 1 S uu (1 . if  H(1 . G (1 . 2 ) S SNR (1 .More on Wiener Filtering UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. 2 ) S (1 . 2 ) wiener 1 H S H * S uu Noiseless case ~ S = 0 (inverse filter) – Wiener filter becomes pseudoinverse filter for S 0 H  H 2 S / Suv * G (1 . if  H(1 . 2 ) S 0 S 0 1 . 2 ) 1 Lec8 – Image Restoration [14] ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) . 2 )  0 Noblur case ~ H = 1 (Wiener Smoothing Filter) – Zerophase filter to attenuate noise according to SNR at each freq.Wu © 2001) Balancing between two jobs for deblurring noisy image – HPF filter for deblurring (undo H distortion) – LPF for suppressing noise G (1 . 2 ) S uu (1 . 2 ) 0. 2 ) S SNR (1 .
8.Comparisons UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.11 ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [15] .Wu © 2001) From Jain Fig.
Example: Wiener Filtering vs. Inverse Filtering UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.Wu © 2004) Figure is from slides at Gonzalez/ Woods DIP book website (Chapter 5) ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [16] .
Example (2): UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.Wu © 2004) Wiener Filtering vs. Inverse Filtering Figure is from slides at Gonzalez/ Woods DIP book website (Chapter 5) ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [17] .
Wu © 2004) To Explore Further ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [18] .UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.
Review: Handling Noise in Deconvolution UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. n2) H (n1. m2) } – Best estimate is conditional mean E[ u(n1 .Wu © 2001/2004) Inverse filtering is sensitive to noise – Does not explicitly modeling and handling noise u(n1. m2) ] Get the best linear estimate Wiener filtering – Produce a linear estimate from the observed image to minimize MSE ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [19] . n2) v(n1. n2) ] 2 } where u’(n1. of {v(m1. n2)  all v(m1 . n2) is a func. noise suppression – Consider the (desired) image and noise as random fields – Minimize MSE between the original and restored e = E{ [ u(n1. n2) – u’(n1. n2) u’(n1. n2) w(n1. n2) G Try to balance between deblurring vs.
of image & noise random fields and freq.d.Wiener Filter: From Theory to Practice UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.s.Wu © 2004) Recall: assumed p. response of distortion filter are known Why make the assumptions? Are these reasonable assumptions? What do they imply in our implementation of Wiener filter? ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [20] .
s.8 & Gonzalez Sec.d.9 Optimize smoothness in restored image (leastsquare of the rough transitions) Constrain differences between blurred image and blurred version of reconstructed image Estimate the restoration filter w/o the need of estimating p.s. of blurred image v and compensate variance due to noise – Estimate p.Wu © 2001) Wiener filter’s size – Theoretically has infinite impulse response ~ require largesize DFTs – Impose filter size constraint: find the best FIR that minimizes MSE Need to estimate power spectrum density of orig. image and estimate parameters – Constrained least square filter ~ see Jain’s Sec.d.5. from a set of representative images similar to the images to be restored – Or use statistical model for the orig.8.s. Unknown distortion H ~ Blind Deconvolution ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [21] .Wiener Filter: Issues to Be Addressed UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M. signal – Estimate p.d.
5 (subsection4. Probability comes into picture because of the existence of noise – Given the observation of blurred image. math. pp136) “Blind Image Deconvolution” by Kundur et al. 1996 ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) Lec8 – Image Restoration [24] . experimentation. Magazine. vol.Basic Ideas of Blind Deconvolution UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.Wu © 2001/2004) Three ways to estimate H: observation. Proc. restore image via Wiener filtering Examine restored image and refine parameter estimation Get local optimums To explore more: Bovik’s Handbook Sec. IEEE Sig.3. try to find the set of parameters that is most likely to produce that blurred output Iteration ~ ExpectationMaximization approach (EM) Given estimated parameters.13. modeling Estimate H via spectrum’s zero patterns – Two major classes of blur (motion blur and outoffocus) – H has nulls related to the type and the parameters of the blur MaximumLikelihood blur estimation – Each set of image model and blur parameters gives a “typical” blurred output.
Filtering Through Transform Domain Operation UMCP ENEE631 Slides (created by M.32 Lec8 – Image Restoration [25] ENEE631 Digital Image Processing (Spring'04) .1 E.2 – – Realize Wiener in DFT domain Use zonal mask in transform domain Realize “ideal” LPF/BPF/HPF Computation complexity for transform could be high for large image From Jain Fig.7.g.31&7.Wu © 2001) E.g.