In Adobe After Effects, how do I change a property of an object (for example the opacity) based on the color of a pixel at a specific location (of another object).
The application is that I want to cover/uncover a part (by changing a layers opacity) if a specific pixel in another layer turns to a specific color.
You can use the sampleImage() function to get a specific pixel color.
This expression is rather slow, so just know that it will affect render times. This link will be useful: https://www.motionscript.com/design-guide/sample-image.html
For example, here's an expression that will change the opacity depending on the luma value of the pixel in the middle of the screen:
var target = thisComp.layer("video");
// sampleImage() returns an array with R,G,B,Alpha values
var color = target.sampleImage(transform.position, [width, height]/2, true, time)
// get the luma by averaging the 3 channel values (there are more scientific ways to do this, but this is quick and simple)
var luma = (color[0] + color[1] + color[2]) / 3
// divide the luma by 255 if you work in 8bits project
var luma_value = luma / 255;
// use the 0-1 value as an opacity percentage.
luma_value * 100;
Related
Matlab offers the ability to set colour limits for the current axis using CAXIS. OpenCV has applyColorMap which can be used to highlight differences in pixel intensity in a greyscale image which I believe maps pixel from 0 - 255.
I am new to Matlab/Image-processing and have been asked to port a simple program from MatLab which uses the CAXIS function to change the "brightness" of a colour map. I have no experience in Matlab but it appears that they use this function to "lower" the intensity requirements needed for pixels to be mapped to a more intense colour on the map
i.e. Colour map using "JET"
When brightness = 1, red = 255
When brightness = 10, red >= 25
The matlab program allows 16bit images to be read in and displayed which obviouly gives higher pixel values whereas everything i've read and done indicates OpenCV only supports 8 bit images (for colour maps)
Therefore my question is, is it possible to provide similar functionality in OpenCV? How do you set the axis limit for a colourmap/how do you scale the colour map lookup table so that "less" intense pixels are scaled to the more intense regions?
A similar question was asked with a reply stating the array needs to be "normalised" but unfortunately I don't quite know how to achieve this and can't reply to the answer as i don't have enough rep!
I have gone ahead and used cv::normalize to set the max value in the array to be maxPixelValue/brightness but that doesn't work at all.
I have also experimented and tried converting my 16bit image into a CV_8UC1 with a scale factor to no avail. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
In my opinion you can use cv::normalize to "crop" values in the source picture to the corresponding ones in color map you are interested in. Say you want your image to be mapped to the blue-ish region of Jet colormap then you should do something like:
int minVal = 0, maxVal = 80;
cv::normalize(src,dst, minVal, maxVal, cv::NORM_MINMAX);
If you plan to apply some kind of custom map it's fairly easy for 1-or3-channel 8-bit image, you only need to create LUT with 255 values (with proper number of channels) and apply it using cv::LUT, more about it in this blog, also see the dosc about LUT
If the image you are working is of different depth, 16-bit or even floating point data I guess all you need to do is write a function like:
template<class T>
T customColorMapper(T input_pixel)
{
T output_pixel = 0;
// do something with output_pixel basing on intput_pixel
return output_pixel;
}
and apply it to each source image pixel like:
cv::Mat dst_image = src_image.clone(); //copy data
dst_image.forEach<TYPE>([](TYPE& input_pixel, const int* pos_row_col) -> void {
input_pixel = customColorMapper<TYPE>(input_pixel);
});
of course TYPE need to be a valid type. Maybe specialized version of this function taking cv::Scalar or cv::Vec3-something would be nice if you need to work with multiple channels.
Hope this helps!
I managed to replicate the MATLAB behaviour but had to resort to manually iterating over each pixel and setting the value to the maximum value for the image depth or scaling the value where needed.
my code looked something like this
cv::minMaxLoc(dst, &min, &max);
double axisThreshold = floor(max / contrastLevel);
for (int i = 0; i < dst.rows; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < dst.cols; j++)
{
short pixel = dst.at<short>(i, j);
if (pixel >= axisThreshold)
{
pixel = USHRT_MAX;
}
else
{
pixel *= (USHRT_MAX / axisThreshold);
}
dst.at<short>(i, j) = cv::saturate_cast<short>(pixel);
}
}
In my example I had a slider which adjusted the contrast/brightness (we called it contrast, the original implementation called it brightness).
When the contrast/brightness was changed, the program would retrieve the maximum pixel value and then compute the axis limit by doing
calculatedThreshold = Max pixel value / contrast
Each pixel more than the threshold gets set to MAX, each pixel lower than the threshold gets multiplied by a scale factor calculated by
scale = MAX Pixel Value / calculatedThreshold.
TBH i can't say I fully understand the maths behind it. I just used trial and error until it worked; any help in that department would be appreciated HOWEVER it seems to do what i want to!
My understanding of the initial matlab implementation and the terminology "brightness" is in fact their attempt to scale the colourmap so that the "brighter" the image, the less intense each pixel had to be to map to a particular colour in the colourmap.
Since applycolourmap only works on 8 bit images, when the brightness increases and the colourmap axis values decrease, we need to ensure the values of the pixels scale accordingly so that they now match up with the "higher" intensity values in the map.
I have seen numerous OPENCV tutorials which use this approach to changing the contrast/brightness but they often promote the use of optimised convertTo (especially if you're trying to use the GPU). However as far as I can see, convertTo applies the aplha/beta values uniformly and not on a pixel by pixel basis therefore I can't use that approach.
I will update this question If i found more suitable OPENCV functions to achieve what I want.
I begin a project about the detection.
My idea is to rank every pixels of an image (Mat).
Then, I will be able to exit which colour is dominant.
The difficulty is a colour is not unic. For exemple, Green is rgb(0, 255, 0) but is almost rgb(10, 240, 20) too.
The goal of my ranking is to exit pixels which are almost same colour. Then, with a pourcentage, I think I can locate my object.
So, my question: Is it a way to ranking pixels by colour ?
Thx a lot in advance for your answers.
There isn't a straight method of ranking as you say of pixels in colours.
However, you can find an approximation to the most dominant one.
There are several way in which you can do it:
You can calculate the histogram for each colour channel - split it into the R,G,B and compute the histogram. Then you can see where the peaks of the resulting graphs are - e.g.
If you k-means cluster the pixels at the image - in other words, represent each pixel as a 3D point with coordinated (R, G, B). Then you can segment the pixels into k most occurring colours.
If you resize the image to a 1x1 pixel image, you'll find the average of all pixel values. If there is a dominant colour, where the majority of the pixels are in close proximity, it will give a good approximation.
There however, are all approximations. Your best choice would be to use k-means and to find the cluster that either has the most elements, or is the most dense.
In case you are looking for way to locate an object with a specific colour, you can use a maximum likelihood estimation. Something like this, which was used to classify different objects, such as grass, cars, building and pavement from satellite images. You can use it with a single colour and get a heat-map of where the object is in terms of likelihood (the percentage of probability) of that pixel belonging to your object.
In an ordinary image, there's always a number of colors involved. To best average the pixels carrying almost the same colors is done by color quantization which is reducing number of colors in an image using techniques like K-mean clustering. This is best explained here with Python code:
https://www.pyimagesearch.com/2014/07/07/color-quantization-opencv-using-k-means-clustering/
After successful quantization, you can just try the following code to rank the colors based on their frequencies in the image.
top_n_colors = []
n = 3
colors_count = {}
(channel_b, channel_g, channel_r) = cv2.split(_processed_image)
# Flattens the 2D single channel array so as to make it easier to iterate over it
channel_b = channel_b.flatten()
channel_g = channel_g.flatten()
channel_r = channel_r.flatten()
for i in range(len(channel_b)):
RGB = str(channel_r[i]) + " " + str(channel_g[i]) + " " + str(channel_b[i])
if RGB in colors_count:
colors_count[RGB] += 1
else:
colors_count[RGB] = 1
# taking the top n colors from the dictionary objects
_top_colors = sorted(colors_count.items(), key=lambda x: x[1], reverse=True)[0:n]
for _color in _top_colors:
_rgb = tuple([int(value) for value in _color[0].split()])
top_n_colors.append(_rgb)
print(top_n_colors)
I want to draw with Direct2D frames which color channels are shifted on x-axis. I know I could set the composition mode to D2D1_COMPOSITE_MODE_PLUS and draw each color channel separately so I can shift them manually. But I want to know if there is another (maybe more efficient) way of drawing shapes with shifted color channels?
I attached an image which shows what I mean.
(I suggest to open this image in a new tab and zoom in to see the effect better)
The way this is typically done is to sample 3 pixels from the input image at a time, each separated by some amount in the x direction, and combine the red from one, the green from another, and the blue from the third. Unfortunately, I don't know DX2D at all, so I don't know the specifics of how it works there. But if you have a bitmap and a pointer to the pixels, you can simply subtract one (or more) pixels from that pointer, and add one or more pixels to the that pointer and read from those memory locations (being careful to account for image edges). Then pull the channels from the values you've read. For example:
RGBA8* pixel = baseAddressOfImage;
RGBA8* pixelMinus1 = pixel - 1;
RGBA8* pixelPuls1 = pixel + 1;
for each pixel in the output
{
result.red = pixelMinus1->red;
result.green = pixel->green;
result.blue = pixelPlus1->blue;
pixelMinus1++;
pixel++;
pixelPlus1++;
}
Note that you can add or subtract more than 1, but as mentioned above, you have to handle what happens at the edges in those cases.
I am looking for a general algorithm to smoothly transition between two colors.
For example, this image is taken from Wikipedia and shows a transition from orange to blue.
When I try to do the same using my code (C++), first idea that came to mind is using the HSV color space, but the annoying in-between colors show-up.
What is the good way to achieve this ? Seems to be related to diminution of contrast or maybe use a different color space ?
I have done tons of these in the past. The smoothing can be performed many different ways, but the way they are probably doing here is a simple linear approach. This is to say that for each R, G, and B component, they simply figure out the "y = m*x + b" equation that connects the two points, and use that to figure out the components in between.
m[RED] = (ColorRight[RED] - ColorLeft[RED]) / PixelsWidthAttemptingToFillIn
m[GREEN] = (ColorRight[GREEN] - ColorLeft[GREEN]) / PixelsWidthAttemptingToFillIn
m[BLUE] = (ColorRight[BLUE] - ColorLeft[BLUE]) / PixelsWidthAttemptingToFillIn
b[RED] = ColorLeft[RED]
b[GREEN] = ColorLeft[GREEN]
b[BLUE] = ColorLeft[BLUE]
Any new color in between is now:
NewCol[pixelXFromLeft][RED] = m[RED] * pixelXFromLeft + ColorLeft[RED]
NewCol[pixelXFromLeft][GREEN] = m[GREEN] * pixelXFromLeft + ColorLeft[GREEN]
NewCol[pixelXFromLeft][BLUE] = m[BLUE] * pixelXFromLeft + ColorLeft[BLUE]
There are many mathematical ways to create a transition, what we really want to do is understand what transition you really want to see. If you want to see the exact transition from the above image, it is worth looking at the color values of that image. I wrote a program way back in time to look at such images and output there values graphically. Here is the output of my program for the above pseudocolor scale.
Based upon looking at the graph, it IS more complex than a linear as I stated above. The blue component looks mostly linear, the red could be emulated to linear, the green however looks to have a more rounded shape. We could perform mathematical analysis of the green to better understand its mathematical function, and use that instead. You may find that a linear interpolation with an increasing slope between 0 and ~70 pixels with a linear decreasing slope after pixel 70 is good enough.
If you look at the bottom of the screen, this program gives some statistical measures of each color component, such as min, max, and average, as well as how many pixels wide the image read was.
A simple linear interpolation of the R,G,B values will do it.
trumpetlicks has shown that the image you used is not a pure linear interpolation. But I think an interpolation gives you the effect you're looking for. Below I show an image with a linear interpolation on top and your original image on the bottom.
And here's the (Python) code that produced it:
for y in range(height/2):
for x in range(width):
p = x / float(width - 1)
r = int((1.0-p) * r1 + p * r2 + 0.5)
g = int((1.0-p) * g1 + p * g2 + 0.5)
b = int((1.0-p) * b1 + p * b2 + 0.5)
pix[x,y] = (r,g,b)
The HSV color space is not a very good color space to use for smooth transitions. This is because the h value, hue, is just used to arbitrarily define different colors around the 'color wheel'. That means if you go between two colors far apart on the wheel, you'll have to dip through a bunch of other colors. Not smooth at all.
It would make a lot more sense to use RGB (or CMYK). These 'component' color spaces are better defined to make smooth transitions because they represent how much of each 'component' a color needs.
A linear transition (see #trumpetlicks answer) for each component value, R, G and B should look 'pretty good'. Anything more than 'pretty good' is going to require an actual human to tweak the values because there are differences and asymmetries to how our eyes perceive color values in different color groups that aren't represented in either RBG or CMYK (or any standard).
The wikipedia image is using the algorithm that Photoshop uses. Unfortunately, that algorithm is not publicly available.
I've been researching into this to build an algorithm that takes a grayscale image as input and colorises it artificially according to a color palette:
■■■■ Grayscale input ■■■■ Output ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
Just like many of the other solutions, the algorithm uses linear interpolation to make the transition between colours. With your example, smooth_color_transition() should be invoked with the following arguments:
QImage input("gradient.jpg");
QVector<QColor> colors;
colors.push_back(QColor(242, 177, 103)); // orange
colors.push_back(QColor(124, 162, 248)); // blue-ish
QImage output = smooth_color_transition(input, colors);
output.save("output.jpg");
A comparison of the original image VS output from the algorithm can be seen below:
(output)
(original)
The visual artefacts that can be observed in the output are already present in the input (grayscale). The input image got these artefacts when it was resized to 189x51.
Here's another example that was created with a more complex color palette:
■■■■ Grayscale input ■■■■ Output ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
Seems to me like it would be easier to create the gradient using RGB values. You should first calculate the change in color for each value based on the width of the gradient. The following pseudocode would need to be done for R, G, and B values.
redDifference = (redValue2 - redValue1) / widthOfGradient
You can then render each pixel with these values like so:
for (int i = 0; i < widthOfGradient; i++) {
int r = round(redValue1 + i * redDifference)
// ...repeat for green and blue
drawLine(i, r, g, b)
}
I know you specified that you're using C++, but I created a JSFiddle demonstrating this working with your first gradient as an example: http://jsfiddle.net/eumf7/
I wrote an simple kinect application where I'm accessing the depth values to detect some objects. I use the following code to get the depth value
depth = NuiDepthPixelToDepth(pBufferRun);
this will give me the depth value for each pixel. Now I want to subselect a region of the image, and get the RGB camera values of this corresponding region.
What I'm not sure about:
do I need to open a color image stream?
or is it enough to just convert the depth into color?
how do I use NuiImageGetColorPixelCoordinateFrameFromDepthPixelFrameAtResolution?
I'm fine with the simplest solution where I have a depth frame and a color frame, so that I can select a ROI with opencv and then crop the color frame accordingly.
do I need to open a color image stream?
Yes. You can get the coordinates in the colour frame without opening the stream, but you won't be able to do anything useful with them because you'll have no colour data to index into!
or is it enough to just convert the depth into color?
There's no meaningful conversion of distance into colour. You need two image streams, and a co-ordinate conversion function.
how do I use NuiImageGetColorPixelCoordinateFrameFromDepthPixelFrameAtResolution?
That's a terribly documented function. Go take a look at NuiImageGetColorPixelCoordinatesFromDepthPixelAtResolution instead, because the function arguments and documentation actually make sense! Depth value and depth (x,y) coordinate in, RGB (x,y) coordinate out. Simple.
To get the RGB data at some given coordinates, you must first grab an RGB frame using NuiImageStreamGetNextFrame to get an INuiFrameTexture instance. Call LockRect on this to get a NUI_LOCKED_RECT. The pBits property of this object is a pointer to the first pixel of the raw XRGB image. This image is stored row wise, in top-to-bottom left-to-right order, with each pixel being represented by 4 sequential bytes representing a padding byte then R, G and B follwing it.
The pixel at position (100, 200) is therefore at
lockedRect->pBits[ ((200 * width * 4) + (100 * 4) ];
and the byte representing the red channel should be at
lockedRect->pBits[ ((200 * width * 4) + (100 * 4) + 1 ];
This is a standard 32bit RGB image format, and the buffer can be freely passed to your image manipulation library of choice... GDI, WIC, OpenCV, IPL, whatever.
(caveat... I'm not totally certain I have the pixel byte ordering correct. I think it is XRGB, but it could be XBGR or BGRX, for example. Testing for which one is actually being returned should be trivial)