I'm new to C++ and getting a bit frustrated with it. Below, in pixelsVector, I am storing each pixel RGB float-value in Pixel and want to dump
all the values to a byte array with pixelsArray so I can output to an image file. HEIGHT and WIDTH refer to the image dimensions. The code below works fine, but I need to specify
the sizes of pixelsArray at run-time, because it may not always be a 500x500 image.
// WIDTH and HEIGHT specified at run-time
vector<vector<Pixel>> pixelsVector (WIDTH, vector<Pixel> (HEIGHT));
...
unsigned char pixelsArray[500][500][3];
for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < 500; j++)
{
// Returns RGB components
vector<float> pixelColors = pixelArray[i][j].getColor();
for (int k = 0; k < 3; k++)
{
pixels[i][j][k] = pixelColors.at(k);
}
}
}
// write to image file
fwrite(pixelsArray, 1, 500*500*3, file);
If I put HEIGHT and WIDTH instead of 500 and 500 above, I get an error since they are not constant values. Now using a 3D vector does seem to work, but fwrite won't take a vector for its first argument. I tried using a triple-pointer array but
it doesn't seem to work at all - maybe I was using it wrong. Here it is using a 3D vector for pixelsArray:
vector<vector<Pixel>> pixelsVector (WIDTH, vector<Pixel> (HEIGHT));
...
vector< vector< vector<unsigned char> > > pixelsArray;
for (int i = 0; i < HEIGHT; i++)
{
pixels.push_back(vector< vector<unsigned char> >());
for (int j = 0; j < WIDTH; j++)
{
pixels[i].push_back(vector<unsigned char>());
vector<float> pixelColors;
pixelColors = pixelArray[i][j].getColor();
for (int k = 0; k < 3; k++)
{
pixels[i][j][k] = pixelColors.at(k);
}
}
}
// Error
fwrite(pixelsArray, 1, 500*500*3, file);
Suggestions?
You could use Boost.MultiArray insead of vectors of vectors, which lets you access he underlying memory with the .data() method.
It looks like you are trying to manipulate images, so you might want to consider using Boost.Gil.
From the last code snippet:
vector<vector<Pixel>> pixelsVector (WIDTH, vector<Pixel> (HEIGHT));
Using uppercase names for variables you risk name collisions with macros. In C++ all uppercase names are conventionally reserved for macros.
...
vector< vector< vector<unsigned char> > > pixelsArray;
Presumably this vector is the same as is called pixels below?
If so, then the standard advice is that it helps to post real code.
Anyway, in order to output those bytes in one efficient operation you need the bytes to be contiguously stored in memory. So a vector of vectors of vectors is out. Use a single vector (C++ guarantees contiguous storage for the buffer of a std::vector).
for (int i = 0; i < HEIGHT; i++)
{
pixels.push_back(vector< vector<unsigned char> >());
for (int j = 0; j < WIDTH; j++)
{
pixels[i].push_back(vector<unsigned char>());
At this point you have an inner vector but it's empty, size 0.
vector<float> pixelColors;
pixelColors = pixelArray[i][j].getColor();
Presumably pixelArray is an instance of a class you have defined?
for (int k = 0; k < 3; k++)
{
pixels[i][j][k] = pixelColors.at(k);
}
Here you're trying to assign to non-existent elements of the empty innermost vector. You can either size it properly in advance, or use the push_back method for each value.
In addition, are you sure that the float values are integers in range 0 through 255 (or more generally, 0 through UCHAR_MAX) and not, say, in the range 0 through 1?
Perhaps you need to scale those values.
}
}
// Error
fwrite(pixelsArray, 1, 500*500*3, file);
If pixelsArray had been a (non-empty) vector of bytes, then you could use &pixelsArray[0] to obtain a pointer to the first byte.
Now, I know, the above only dissects some of what's wrong, and doesn't tell you directly what's right. :-)
But some more information would be needed to give example code for doing this, like (1) what are your float values, and (2) what do you want in your file?
Anyway, hope this helps,
– Alf
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.
Suppose i have a vector<Mat> called regionFeaMatand regionFeaMat.size() == 81 .In other words, regionFeaMat have 81 equal size matrix, and regionFeaMat[0].rows==256 and regionFeaMat[0].cols==1. I want to convert reginFeaMat to vector<float> reginFeaVec. I tried with following code but i got wrong result:
vector<float> regionFeaVec;
regionFeaVec.assign((float*)regionFeaMat[0].datastart, (float*)regionFeaMat[80].dataend);
You seem to have made a few wrong assumptions.
std::vector does store its elements contiguously in memory, but cv::Mat is a header containing a pointer to its internal buffer, so only pointers in vector<Mat> are stored contiguously, not the Mat data itself. Because of that, the memory that lies in between (float*)regionFeaMat[0].dataend and (float*)regionFeaMat[80].datastart is some random garbage - if it does contain other Mat's data partially, it's pure luck.
Because of the above, you can't have a one-liner assigning vector to any other vector and you have to insert each mat separately instead. Try something like this:
// prevent vector reallocation after each Mat insertion:
regionFeaVec.reserve(regionFeaMat.size()*regionFeaMat[0].cols*regionFeaMat[0].rows);
for (int i = 0; i < regionFeaMat.size(); ++i)
{
if (regionFeaMat[i].isContinuous())
regionFeaVec.insert(
regionFeaVec.end(),
(float*)regionFeaMat[i].datastart,
(float*)regionFeaMat[i].dataend
);
else
{
for (int j = 0; j < regionFeaMat[i].rows; ++j)
{
const float* row = regionFeaMat[i].ptr<float>(j);
regionFeaVec.insert(regionFeaVec.end(), row, row + regionFeaMat[i].cols);
}
}
}
Note that I'm checking if a particular Mat object is continuous, because as per OpenCV docs, each row may contain gaps at the end in some cases, and in that case we have to read the matrix row by row.
This code can be simplified, because if matrix is continuous, we may treat it as a 1D vector as per the docs referenced above:
// prevent vector reallocation after each Mat insertion:
regionFeaVec.reserve(regionFeaMat.size()*regionFeaMat[0].cols*regionFeaMat[0].rows);
for (int i = 0; i < regionFeaMat.size(); ++i)
{
cv::Size size = regionFeaMat[i].size();
if (regionFeaMat[i].isContinuous())
{
size.width *= size.height;
size.height = 1;
}
for (int j = 0; j < size.height; ++j)
{
const float* row = regionFeaMat[i].ptr<float>(j);
regionFeaVec.insert(regionFeaVec.end(), row, row + size.width);
}
}
If you want to prevent vector reallocation in more general cases, you also have to change the method of calculating the number of elements passed to reserve(). The method I use assumes all the Mat objects have only two dimensions that are equal for all the objects since this is how you described your problem.
Also, if you want to assign it to vector<float>, be sure that the element type of regionFeaMat is CV_32F.
I'm trying to print an image using OpenCV defining a 400x400 Mat:
plot2 = cv::Mat(400,400, CV_8U, 255);
But when I try print the points, something strange happens. The y coordinate only prints to the first 100 values. That is, if I print the point (50,100), it does not print it in the 100/400th part of the columns, but at the end. Somehow, 400 columns have turned into 100.
For example, when running this:
for (int j = 0; j < 95; ++j){
plot2.at<int>(20, j) = 0;
}
cv::imshow("segunda pared", plot2);
Shows this (the underlined part is the part corresponding to the code above):
A line that goes to 95 almost occupies all of the 400 points when it should only occupy 95/400th of the screen.
What am I doing wrong?
When you defined your cv::Mat, you told clearly that it is from the type CV_8U:
plot2 = cv::Mat(400,400, CV_8U, 255);
But when you are trying to print it, you are telling that its type is int which is usually a signed 32 bit not unsigned 8 bit. So the solution is:
for (int j = 0; j < 95; ++j){
plot2.at<uchar>(20, j) = 0;
}
Important note: Be aware that OpenCV uses the standard C++ types not the fixed ones. So, there is no need to use fixed size types like uint16_t or similar. because when compiling OpenCV & your code on another platform both of them will change together.
BTW, one of the good way to iterate through your cv::Mat is:
for (size_t row = 0; j < my_mat.rows; ++row){
auto row_ptr=my_mat.ptr<uchar>(row);
for(size_t col=0;col<my_mat.cols;++col){
//do whatever you want with row_ptr[col] (read/write)
}
}
I have a bunch of 3d arrays generated using boost::multi_array in a function. I would not want to use all these arrays in another code of mine is there any way to do this?
When I had a 2d case what I did was
typedef boost::numeric::ublas::matrix<double> fils;
boost::array<fils,5> filter1(unsigned width, unsigned height)
{
matrix<double>l,m,n,o,p;
//perform other steps//
boost::array<fils,5> t={l,m,n,o,p};
return t;
}
main.cpp
int main()
{
boost::array<fils,5> z;
z= t(w,h);
}
for the 2d case this method works fine. I now want to do the same with a 3D case where
typedef boost::multi_array<double,3>x;
boost::array<x,12>x1(unsigned w,unsigned h,unsigned s)
{
typedef boost::multi_array<double,3>M;
typedef M::index Mi;
m l(boost::extents[w][h][s]),m(boost::extents[w][h][s]),n(boost::extents[w][h][s]),o(boost::extents[w][h][s]);
//perform steps//
}
how do I get the matrices l,m,n,o,p so that I can use them as source in other bits of code.
In my opinion the most elegant solution is to declare a 4-D multi_array like so :
typedef boost::multi_array<double,4> FloatArray4D;
typedef M::index Mi;
function create4dArray()
{
FloatArray4D returnValue(boost::extents[w][h][s][4]);
// Populate the array as you please here is an example.
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < w; j++) {
for (int k = 0; k < h; k++) {
for (int x = 0; x < s; x++) {
returnValue[j][k][x][i] = i+j*10+k*100+x*1000;
}
}
}
}
return returnValue;
}
Then you can access the subarray by indexing on the last coordinate. It might be more efficient to index them by the first coordinate (in terms of localization of the data) but I don't know the implementation details of boost::multi_array (can someone weight in on this in comments ?)
To extract a view (no-copy) of your 3-D data from the 4-D multi_array created you can use this :
typedef boost::multi_array_types::index_range range;
FloatArray4D::index_gen indices;
FloatArray4D my4DArray = create4dArray();
// Create a new view with 3 dimentions (corresponding to your l) fixing the 4th dimention to 0
FloatArray4D::array_view<3>::type l = [indices[range()][range()][range()][0];
then you can use l as if it was your 3-D array.
PS: NEVER name something x or M, especially not a type. Yes long names are a pain to type, but get a decent text editor with auto-completion and it won't be a problem.
Knowing what an object is by its name however, will always be great. It improves readability, for you and for anyone else who has to read your code.
Also do not typedef inside a function. If you want to define a custom type do it in a header file that is shared.
You don't want to have to declare that type everywhere.
And actually don't overuse typedef, only use it if it improves readability.
I guess it's such an easy question (I'm coming from Java), but I can't figure out how it works.
I simply want to increment an vector element by one. The reason for this is, that I want to compute a histogram out of image values. But whatever I try I just can accomplish to assign a value to the vector. But not to increment it by one!
This is my histogram function:
void histogram(unsigned char** image, int height,
int width, vector<unsigned char>& histogramArray) {
for (int i = 0; i < width; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < height; j++) {
// histogramArray[1] = (int)histogramArray[1] + (int)1;
// add histogram position by one if greylevel occured
histogramArray[(int)image[i][j]]++;
}
}
// display output
for (int i = 0; i < 256; i++) {
cout << "Position: " << i << endl;
cout << "Histogram Value: " << (int)histogramArray[i] << endl;
}
}
But whatever I try to add one to the histogramArray position, it leads to just 0 in the output. I'm only allowed to assign concrete values like:
histogramArray[1] = 2;
Is there any simple and easy way? I though iterators are hopefully not necesarry at this point, because I know the exakt index position where I want to increment something.
EDIT:
I'm so sorry, I should have been more precise with my question, thank you for your help so far! The code above is working, but it shows a different mean value out of the histogram (difference of around 90) than it should. Also the histogram values are way different than in a graphic program - even though the image values are exactly the same! Thats why I investigated the function and found out if I set the histogram to zeros and then just try to increase one element, nothing happens! This is the commented code above:
for (int i = 0; i < width; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < height; j++) {
histogramArray[1]++;
// add histogram position by one if greylevel occured
// histogramArray[(int)image[i][j]]++;
}
}
So the position 1 remains 0, instead of having the value height*width. Because of this, I think the correct calculation histogramArray[image[i][j]]++; is also not working properly.
Do you have any explanation for this? This was my main question, I'm sorry.
Just for completeness, this is my mean function for the histogram:
unsigned char meanHistogram(vector<unsigned char>& histogram) {
int allOccurences = 0;
int allValues = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 256; i++) {
allOccurences += histogram[i] * i;
allValues += histogram[i];
}
return (allOccurences / (float) allValues) + 0.5f;
}
And I initialize the image like this:
unsigned char** image= new unsigned char*[width];
for (int i = 0; i < width; i++) {
image[i] = new unsigned char[height];
}
But there shouldn't be any problem with the initialization code, since all other computations work perfectly and I am able to manipulate and safe the original image. But it's true, that I should change width and height - since I had only square images it didn't matter so far.
The Histogram is created like this and then the function is called like that:
vector<unsigned char> histogramArray(256);
histogram(array, adaptedHeight, adaptedWidth, histogramArray);
So do you have any clue why this part histogramArray[1]++; don't increases my histogram? histogramArray[1] remains 0 all the time! histogramArray[1] = 2; is working perfectly. Also histogramArray[(int)image[i][j]]++; seems to calculate something, but as I said, I think it's wrongly calculating.
I appreciate any help very much! The reason why I used a 2D Array is simply because it is asked for. I like the 1D version also much more, because it's way simpler!
You see, the current problem in your code is not incrementing a value versus assigning to it; it's the way you index your image. The way you've written your histogram function and the image access part puts very fine restrictions on how you need to allocate your images for this code to work.
For example, assuming your histogram function is as you've written it above, none of these image allocation strategies will work: (I've used char instead of unsigned char for brevity.)
char image [width * height]; // Obvious; "char[]" != "char **"
char * image = new char [width * height]; // "char*" != "char **"
char image [height][width]; // Most surprisingly, this won't work either.
The reason why the third case won't work is tough to explain simply. Suffice it to say that a 2D array like this will not implicitly decay into a pointer to pointer, and if it did, it would be meaningless. Contrary to what you might read in some books or hear from some people, in C/C++, arrays and pointers are not the same thing!
Anyway, for your histogram function to work correctly, you have to allocate your image like this:
char** image = new char* [height];
for (int i = 0; i < height; ++i)
image[i] = new char [width];
Now you can fill the image, for example:
for (int i = 0; i < height; ++i)
for (int j = 0; j < width; ++j)
image[i][j] = rand() % 256; // Or whatever...
On an image allocated like this, you can call your histogram function and it will work. After you're done with this image, you have to free it like this:
for (int i = 0; i < height; ++i)
delete[] image[i];
delete[] image;
For now, that's enough about allocation. I'll come back to it later.
In addition to the above, it is vital to note the order of iteration over your image. The way you've written it, you iterate over your columns on the outside, and your inner loop walks over the rows. Most (all?) image file formats and many (most?) image processing applications I've seen do it the other way around. The memory allocations I've shown above also assume that the first index is for the row, and the second is for the column. I suggest you do this too, unless you've very good reasons not to.
No matter which layout you choose for your images (the recommended row-major, or your current column-major,) it is in issue that you should always keep in your mind and take notice of.
Now, on to my recommended way of allocating and accessing images and calculating histograms.
I suggest that you allocate and free images like this:
// Allocate:
char * image = new char [height * width];
// Free:
delete[] image;
That's it; no nasty (de)allocation loops, and every image is one contiguous block of memory. When you want to access row i and column j (note which is which) you do it like this:
image[i * width + j] = 42;
char x = image[i * width + j];
And you'd calculate the histogram like this:
void histogram (
unsigned char * image, int height, int width,
// Note that the elements here are pixel-counts, not colors!
vector<unsigned> & histogram
) {
// Make sure histogram has enough room; you can do this outside as well.
if (histogram.size() < 256)
histogram.resize (256, 0);
int pixels = height * width;
for (int i = 0; i < pixels; ++i)
histogram[image[i]]++;
}
I've eliminated the printing code, which should not be there anyway. Note that I've used a single loop to go through the whole image; this is another advantage of allocating a 1D array. Also, for this particular function, it doesn't matter whether your images are row-major or column major, since it doesn't matter in what order we go through the pixels; it only matters that we go through all the pixels and nothing more.
UPDATE: After the question update, I think all of the above discussion is moot and notwithstanding! I believe the problem could be in the declaration of the histogram vector. It should be a vector of unsigned ints, not single bytes. Your problem seems to be that the value of the vector elements seem to stay at zero when your simplify the code and increment just one element, and are off from the values they need to be when you run the actual code. Well, this could be a symptom of numeric wrap-around. If the number of pixels in your image are a a multiple of 256 (e.g. 32x32 or 1024x1024 image) then it is natural that the sum of their number would be 0 mod 256.
I've already alluded to this point in my original answer. If you read my implementation of the histogram function, you see in the signature that I've declared my vector as vector<unsigned> and have put a comment above it that says this victor counts pixels, so its data type should be suitable.
I guess I should have made it bolder and clearer! I hope this solves your problem.