I have a questions about a for loop and its return value. This is C++ code, and I'm using openCV 2.4V.
Input to this function is max value of 600 images with pooling.
600 images << pooling << max value points.
The size of "res" matrix is 600x128 and vec.size() = 600.
For me, within the for loop, the res never get updated, however return value is not zeros.
I suspected
"ptmat.copyTo(subView)"
because, I thought that is not necessary line. However when I took that out, res did not get updated(being zero like initial Mat). Can anybody explain how does the res value get updated?
Also why does this function is called concatenate..?
Mat
concatenateMat(vector<vector<Mat> > &vec) {
int subFeatures = vec[0][0].rows * vec[0][0].cols;
int height = vec[0].size() * subFeatures;
int width = vec.size();
Mat res = Mat::zeros(height, width, CV_64FC1);
for (int i = 0; i<vec.size(); i++) {
for (int j = 0; j<vec[i].size(); j++) {
Rect roi = Rect(i, j * subFeatures, 1, subFeatures);
Mat subView = res(roi);
Mat ptmat = vec[i][j].reshape(0, subFeatures);
ptmat.copyTo(subView);
}
}
return res;
}
According to OpenCV documentation, the Mat::operator() does not make a copy of matrix data, thus any change to subView matrix object in the loop will be reflected in res matrix object as well. That's the line you've mentioned:
ptmat.copyTo(subView);
It's called concatenate because it concatenates 2D vector of Mat objects into a single one.
Related
In Python I normally use functions like vstack, stack, etc to easily create a 3D array by stacking 2D arrays one onto another.
Is there any way to do this in C++?
In particular, I have loaded a image into a Mat variable with OpenCV like:
cv::Mat im = cv::imread("image.png", 0);
I would like to make a 3D array/Mat of N layers by stacking copies of that Mat variable.
EDIT: This new 3D matrix has to be "travellable" by adding an integer to any of its components, such that if I am in the position (x1,y1,1) and I add +1 to the last component, I arrive to (x1,y1,2). Similarly for any of the coordinates/components of the 3D matrix.
SOLVED: Both answers from #Aram and #Nejc do exactly what expected. I set #Nejc 's answer as the correct one for his shorter code.
The Numpy function vstack returns a contiguous array. Any C++ solution that produces vectors or arrays of cv::Mat objects does not reflect the behaviour of vstack in this regard, becase separate "layers" belonging to individual cv::Mat objects will not be stored in contiguous buffer (unless a careful allocation of underlying buffers is done in advance of course).
I present the solution that copies all arrays into a three-dimensional cv::Mat object with a contiguous buffer. As far as the idea goes, this answer is similar to Aram's answer. But instead of assigning pixel values one by one, I take advantage of OpenCV functions. At the beginning I allocate the matrix which has a size N X ROWS X COLS, where N is the number of 2D images I want to "stack" and ROWS x COLS are dimensions of each of these images.
Then I make N steps. On every step, I obtain the pointer to the location of the first element along the "outer" dimension. I pass that pointer to the constructor of temporary Mat object that acts as a kind of wrapper around the memory chunk of size ROWS x COLS (but no copies are made) that begins at the address that is pointed-at by pointer. I then use copyTo method to copy i-th image into that memory chunk. Code for N = 2:
cv::Mat img0 = cv::imread("image0.png", CV_IMREAD_GRAYSCALE);
cv::Mat img1 = cv::imread("image1.png", CV_IMREAD_GRAYSCALE);
cv::Mat images[2] = {img0, img1}; // you can also use vector or some other container
int dims[3] = { 2, img0.rows, img0.cols }; // dimensions of new image
cv::Mat joined(3, dims, CV_8U); // same element type (CV_8U) as input images
for(int i = 0; i < 2; ++i)
{
uint8_t* ptr = &joined.at<uint8_t>(i, 0, 0); // pointer to first element of slice i
cv::Mat destination(img0.rows, img0.cols, CV_8U, (void*)ptr); // no data copy, see documentation
images[i].copyTo(destination);
}
This answer is in response to the question above of:
In Python I normally use functions like vstack, stack, etc to easily create a 3D array by stacking 2D arrays one onto another.
This is certainly possible, you can add matrices into a vector which would be your "stack"
For instance you could use a
std::vector<cv::Mat>>
This would give you a vector of mats, which would be one slice, and then you could "layer" those by adding more slices vector
If you then want to have multiple stacks you can add that vector into another vector:
std::vector<std::vector<cv::Mat>>
To add matrix to an array you do:
myVector.push_back(matrix);
Edit for question below
In such case, could I travel from one position (x1, y1, z1) to an immediately upper position doing (x1,y1,z1+1), such that my new position in the matrix would be (x1,y1,z2)?
You'll end up with something that looks a lot like this. If you have a matrix at element 1 in your vector, it doesn't really have any relationship to the element[2] except for the fact that you have added it into that point. If you want to build relationships then you will need to code that in yourself.
You can actually create a 3D or ND mat with opencv, you need to use the constructor that takes the dimensions as input. Then copy each matrix into (this case) the 3D array
#include <opencv2/opencv.hpp>
using namespace cv;
using namespace std;
int main() {
// Dimensions for the constructor... set dims[0..2] to what you want
int dims[] = {5, 5, 5}; // 5x5x5 3d mat
Mat m = Mat::zeros(5, 5, CV_8UC1);
for (size_t i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
for (size_t k = 0; k < 5; k++) {
m.at<uchar>(i, k) = i + k;
}
}
// Mat with constructor specifying 3 dimensions with dimensions sizes in dims.
Mat 3DMat = Mat(3, dims, CV_8UC1);
// We fill our 3d mat.
for (size_t i = 0; i < m2.size[0]; i++) {
for (size_t k = 0; k < m2.size[1]; k++) {
for (size_t j = 0; j < m2.size[2]; j++) {
3DMat.at<uchar>(i, k, j) = m.at<uchar>(k, j);
}
}
}
// We print it to show the 5x5x5 array.
for (size_t i = 0; i < m2.size[0]; i++) {
for (size_t k = 0; k < m2.size[1]; k++) {
for (size_t j = 0; j < m2.size[2]; j++) {
std::cout << (int) 3DMat.at<uchar>(i, k, j) << " ";
}
std::cout << endl;
}
std::cout << endl;
}
return 0;
}
Based on the question and comments, I think you are looking for something like this:
std::vector<cv::Mat> vec_im;
//In side for loop:
vec_im.push_back(im);
Then, you can access it by:
Scalar intensity_1 = vec_im[z1].at<uchar>(y, x);
Scalar intensity_2 = vec_im[z2].at<uchar>(y, x);
This assumes that the image is single channel.
I'm working on a simple ghost-trail effect in C++. I am adding cv::Mat images into a std::vector, I have a function that can access the images, change opacity & add two together, which works:
void ghostEffect(std::vector<cv::Mat> &srcImages, cv::Mat &dstImage)
{
static int currFrame = 0;
dstImage = srcImages[currFrame%srcImages.size]*0.5+srcImages[(currFrame+1)%srcImages.size]*0.5;
currFrame++;
}
I would like to use a for() loop to iterate over many images in the vector, however when I do I get a seg fault. Wondering what I am doing wrong?
void ghostEffect(std::vector<cv::Mat> &srcImages, cv::Mat &dstImage)
{
static int currFrame = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < srcImages.size; i++)
{
dstImage += srcImages[(currFrame+i)%srcImages.size]*(1/srcImages.size);
}
currFrame++;
}
The code snippet is strange. It should not be compiled. std::vector::size is a method, thus your loop compares i with the address of the method std::vector::size, which may be much bigger than the vector size.
Also result of the expression 1/srcImages.size() is always zero if the vector size is greater then 1, since arguments of int type produces int type.
I suppose you have to code the function like bellow:
void ghostEffect(std::vector<cv::Mat> &srcImages, cv::Mat &dstImage)
{
static int currFrame = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < srcImages.size(); i++)
{
dstImage += srcImages[(currFrame+i)%srcImages.size()]*(1.0/srcImages.size());
}
currFrame++;
}
The first snippet is working by a lucky coincidence until currFrame exceeds the vector size. Replace srcImages.size with srcImages.size() too.
The following code is just supposed to load an image, fill it with a constant value and save it again.
Of course that doesn't have a purpose yet, but still it just doesn't work.
I can read the pixel values in the loop, but all changes are without effect and saves the file as it was loaded.
Think I followed the "efficient way" here accurately: http://docs.opencv.org/2.4/doc/tutorials/core/how_to_scan_images/how_to_scan_images.html
int main()
{
Mat im = imread("C:\\folder\\input.jpg");
int channels = im.channels();
int pixels = im.cols * channels;
if (!im.isContinuous())
{ return 0; } // Just to show that I've thought of that. It never exits here.
uchar* f = im.ptr<uchar>(0);
for (int i = 0; i < pixels; i++)
{
f[i] = (uchar)100;
}
imwrite("C:\\folder\\output.jpg", im);
return 0;
}
Normal cv functions like cvtColor() are taking effect as expected.
Are the changes through the array happening on a buffer somehow?
Huge thanks in advance!
The problem is that you are not looking at all pixels in the image. Your code only looks at im.cols*im.channels() which is a relatively small number as compared to the size of the image (im.cols*im.rows*im.channels()). When used in the for loop using the pointer, it only sets a value for couple of rows in an image ( if you look closely you will notice the saved image will have these set ).
Below is the corrected code:
int main()
{
Mat im = imread("C:\\folder\\input.jpg");
int channels = im.channels();
int pixels = im.cols * im.rows * channels;
if (!im.isContinuous())
{ return 0; } // Just to show that I've thought of that. It never exits here.
uchar* f = im.ptr<uchar>(0);
for (int i = 0; i < pixels; i++)
{
f[i] = (uchar)100;
}
imwrite("C:\\folder\\output.jpg", im);
return 0;
}
What is the fastest way of assigning a vector to a matrix row in a loop? I want to fill a data matrix along its rows with vectors. These vectors are computed in a loop. This loop last until all the entries of data matrix is filled those vectors.
Currently I am using cv::Mat::at<>() method for accessing the elements of the matrix and fill them with the vector, however, it seems this process is quite slow. I have tried another way by using cv::Mat::X.row(index) = data_vector, it works fast but fill my matrix X with some garbage values which I can not understand, why.
I read that there exists another way of using pointers (fastest way), however, I can not able to understand. Can somebody explain how to use them or other different methods?
Here is a part of my code:
#define OFFSET 2
cv::Mat im = cv::imread("001.png", CV_LOAD_IMAGE_GRAYSCALE);
cv::Mat X = cv::Mat((im.rows - 2*OFFSET)*(im.cols - 2*OFFSET), 25, CV_64FC1); // Holds the training data. Data contains image patches
cv::Mat patch = cv::Mat(5, 5, im.type()); // Holds a cropped image patch
typedef cv::Vec<float, 25> Vec25f;
int ind = 0;
for (int row = 0; row < (im.rows - 2*OFFSET); row++){
for (int col = 0; col < (im.cols - 2*OFFSET); col++){
cv::Mat temp_patch = im(cv::Rect(col, row, 5, 5)); // crop an image patch (5x5) at each pixel
patch = temp_patch.clone(); // Needs to do this because temp_patch is not continuous in memory
patch.convertTo(patch, CV_64FC1);
Vec25f data_vector = patch.reshape(0, 1); // make it row vector (1X25).
for (int i = 0; i < 25; i++)
{
X.at<float>(ind, i) = data_vector[i]; // Currently I am using this way (quite slow).
}
//X_train.row(ind) = patch.reshape(0, 1); // Tried this but it assigns some garbage values to the data matrix!
ind += 1;
}
}
To do it the regular opencv way you could do :-
ImageMat.row(RowIndex) = RowMat.clone();
or
RowMat.copyTo(ImageMat.row(RowIndex));
Haven't tested for correctness or speed.
Just a couple of edits in your code
double * xBuffer = X.ptr<double>(0);
for (int row = 0; row < (im.rows - 2*OFFSET); row++){
for (int col = 0; col < (im.cols - 2*OFFSET); col++){
cv::Mat temp_patch = im(cv::Rect(col, row, 5, 5)); // crop an image patch (5x5) at each pixel
patch = temp_patch.clone(); // Needs to do this because temp_patch is not continuous in memory
patch.convertTo(patch, CV_64FC1);
memcpy(xBuffer, patch.data, 25*sizeof(double));
xBuffer += 25;
}
}
Also, you dont seem to do any computation in patch just extract grey level values, so you can create X with the same type as im, and convert it to double at the end. In this way, you could memcpy each row of your patch, the address in memory beeing `unsigned char* buffer = im.ptr(row) + col
According to the docs:
if you need to process a whole row of matrix, the most efficient way is to get the pointer to the row first, and then just use plain C operator []:
// compute sum of positive matrix elements
// (assuming that M is double-precision matrix)
double sum=0;
for(int i = 0; i < M.rows; i++)
{
const double* Mi = M.ptr<double>(i);
for(int j = 0; j < M.cols; j++)
sum += std::max(Mi[j], 0.);
}
I am trying to create my personal Blob Detection algorithm
As far as I know I first must create different Gaussian Kernels with different sigmas (which I am doing using Mat kernel= getGaussianKernel(x,y);) Then get the Laplacian of that kernel and then filter the Image with that so I create my scalespace. Now I need to find the Local Maximas in each result Image of the scalespace. But I cannot seem to find a proper way to do so.... my Code so far is
vector <Point> GetLocalMaxima(const cv::Mat Src,int MatchingSize, int Threshold)
{
vector <Point> vMaxLoc(0);
if ((MatchingSize % 2 == 0) ) // MatchingSize has to be "odd" and > 0
{
return vMaxLoc;
}
vMaxLoc.reserve(100); // Reserve place for fast access
Mat ProcessImg = Src.clone();
int W = Src.cols;
int H = Src.rows;
int SearchWidth = W - MatchingSize;
int SearchHeight = H - MatchingSize;
int MatchingSquareCenter = MatchingSize/2;
uchar* pProcess = (uchar *) ProcessImg.data; // The pointer to image Data
int Shift = MatchingSquareCenter * ( W + 1);
int k = 0;
for(int y=0; y < SearchHeight; ++y)
{
int m = k + Shift;
for(int x=0;x < SearchWidth ; ++x)
{
if (pProcess[m++] >= Threshold)
{
Point LocMax;
Mat mROI(ProcessImg, Rect(x,y,MatchingSize,MatchingSize));
minMaxLoc(mROI,NULL,NULL,NULL,&LocMax);
if (LocMax.x == MatchingSquareCenter && LocMax.y == MatchingSquareCenter)
{
vMaxLoc.push_back(Point( x+LocMax.x,y + LocMax.y ));
// imshow("W1",mROI);cvWaitKey(0); //For gebug
}
}
}
k += W;
}
return vMaxLoc;
}
which I found in this thread here, which it supposedly returns a vector of points where the maximas are. it does return a vector of points but all the x and y coordinates of each point are always -17891602... What to do???
Please if you are to lead me in something else other than correcting my code be informative because I know nothing about opencv. I am just learning
The problem here is that your LocMax point is declared inside the inner loop and never initialized, so it's returning garbage data every time. If you look back at the StackOverflow question you linked, you'll see that their similar variable Point maxLoc(0,0) is declared at the top and constructed to point at the middle of the search window. It only needs to be initialized once. Subsequent loop iterations will replace the value with the minMaxLoc function result.
In summary, remove this line in your inner loop:
Point LocMax; // delete this
And add a slightly altered version near the top:
vector <Point> vMaxLoc(0); // This was your original first line
Point LocMax(0,0); // your new second line
That should get you started anyway.
I found it guys. The problem was my threshold was too high. I do not understand why it gave me negative points instead of zero points but lowering the threshold worked