by Andrey Filippov
This post continues discussion of the small tile space-variant frequency domain (FD) image processing in the camera, it demonstrates that modulated complex lapped transform (MCLT) of the Bayer mosaic color images requires almost 3 times less computational resources than that of the full RGB color data.
“Small Tile” and “Space Variant”
Why “small tile“? Most camera images have short (up to few pixels) correlation/mutual information span related to the acquisition system properties – optical aberrations cause a single scene object point influence a small area of the sensor pixels. When matching multiple images increase of the window size reduces the lateral (x,y) resolution, so many of the 3d reconstruction algorithms do not use any windows at all, and process every pixel individually. Other limitation on the window size comes from the fact that FD conversions (Fourier and similar) in Cartesian coordinates are shift-invariant, but are sensitive to scale and rotation mismatch. So targeting say 0.1 pixel disparity accuracy the scale mismatch should not cause error accumulation over window width exceeding that value. With 8×8 tiles (16×16 overlapped) acceptable scale mismatch (such as focal length variations) should be under 1%. That tolerance is reasonable, but it can not get much tighter.
What is “space variant“? One of the most universal operations performed in the FD is convolution (also related to correlation) that exploits convolution-multiplication property. Mathematically convolution applies the same operation to each of the points of the source data, so shifted object of the source image produces just a shifted result after convolution. In the physical world it is a close approximation, but not an exact one. Stars imaged by a telescope may have sharper images in the center, but more blurred in the peripheral areas. While close (angularly) stars produce almost the same shape images, the far ones do not. This does not invalidate convolution approach completely, but requires kernel to (smoothly) vary over the input images [1, 2], makes it a space-variant kernel.
Figure 1. Complex Lapped Transform with DCT-IV/DST-IV: time-domain aliasing cancellation (TDAC) property. a) selection of overlapping input subsequences 2*N-long, multiplication by sine window; b) creating N-long sequences for DCT-IV (left) and DST-IV (right); c) (after frequency domain processing) extending N-long sequence using DCT-IV boundary conditions (DST-IV processing is similar); d) second multiplication by sine window; e) combining partial data
There is another issue related to the space-variant kernels. Fractional pixel shifts are required for multiple steps of the processing: aberration correction (obvious in the case of the lateral chromatic aberration), image rectification before matching that accounts for lens optical distortion, camera orientation mismatch and epipolar geometry transformations. Traditionally it is handled by the image rectification that involves re-sampling of the pixel values for a new grid using some type of the interpolation. This process distorts the signal data and introduces non-linear errors that reduce accuracy of the correlation, that is important for subpixel disparity measurements. Our approach completely eliminates resampling and combines integer pixel shift in the pixel domain and delegates the residual fractional pixel shift (±0.5 pix) to the FD, where it is implemented as a cosine/sine phase rotator. Multiple sources of the required pixel shift are combined for each tile, and then a single phase rotation is performed as a last step of pixel domain to FD conversion.
Frequency Domain Conversion with the Modulated Complex Lapped Transform
Modulated Complex Lapped Transform (MCLT)[3] can be used to split input sequence into overlapping fractions, processed separately and then recombined without block artifacts. Popular application is the signal compression where “processed separately” means compressed by the encoder (may be lossy) and then reconstructed by the decoder. MCLT is similar to the MDCT that is implemented with DCT-IV, but it additionally preserves and allows frequency domain modification of the signal phase. This feature is required for our application (fractional pixel shifts and asymmetrical lens aberrations modify phase), and MCLT includes both MDCT and MDST (that use DCT-IV and DST-IV respectively). For the image processing (2d conversion) four sub-transforms are needed:
- horizontal DCT-IV followed by vertical DCT-IV
- horizontal DST-IV followed by vertical DCT-IV
- horizontal DCT-IV followed by vertical DST-IV
- horizontal DST-IV followed by vertical DST-IV
(more…)
by Andrey Filippov
Fig.1. Image comparison of the different processing stages output
Results of the processing of the color image
Previous blog post
“Lens aberration correction with the lapped MDCT” described our experiments with the lapped MDCT
[1] for optical aberration corrections of a single color channel and separation of the asymmetrical kernel into a small asymmetrical part for direct convolution and a larger symmetrical one to be applied in the frequency domain of the MDCT. We supplemented this processing chain with additional steps of the image conditioning to evaluate the overall quality of the of the results and feasibility of the MDCT approach for processing in the camera FPGA.
Image comparator in Fig.1 allows to see the difference between the images generated from the results of the several stages of the processing. It makes possible to compare any two of the image layers by either sliding the image separator or by just clicking on the image – that alternates right/left images. Zoom is controlled by the scroll wheel (click on the zoom indicator fits image), pan – by dragging.
Original image was acquired with Elphel model 393 camera with 5 Mpix MT9P006 image sensor and Sunex DSL227 fisheye lens, saved in
jp4 format as a raw Bayer data at 98% compression quality. Calibration was performed with the Java
program using calibration pattern visible in the image itself. The program is designed to work with the low-distortion lenses so fisheye was a stretch and the calibration kernels near the edges are just replicated from the ones closer to the center, so aberration correction is only partial in those areas.
First two layers differ just by added annotations, they both show output of a simple bilinear demosaic processing, same as generated by the camera when running in JPEG mode. Next layers show different stages of the processing, details are provided later in this blog post.
(more…)
by Andrey Filippov
As we finished with the basic camera functionality and tested the first Eyesis4π built with the new
10393 system boards (it is smaller, requires less power and, is faster) we are moving forward with the in-camera image processing. We plan to combine our current camera calibration methods that require off-line post processing and the real-time image correction using the camera own FPGA resources. This project development will require switching between the actual FPGA coding and the software implementation of the same algorithms before going to the next step – software is still easier to design. The first part was in FPGA realm – it was to implement the fundamental image processing block that we already know we’ll be using and see how much of the resources it needs.
DCT type IV as a building block for in-camera image processing
We consider a small (8×8 pixel)
DCT-IV to be a universal block for conditioning of the raw acquired images. Such operations as lens optical aberrations correction, color conversion (de-mosaic) in the presence of the lateral chromatic aberration, image rectification (de-warping) are easier to perform in the frequency domain using convolution-multiplication property and other algorithms.
In post-processing we use
DFT (Discrete Fourier Transform) over rather large (64×64 to 512×512) tiles, but that would be too much for the in-camera processing. First is the tile size – for good lenses we do not need that large convolution kernels. Additionally we plan to combine several processing steps into one (based on our off-line post-processing experience) and so we do not need to sub-sample images – in our current software we double resolution of the raw images at the beginning and scale back the final result to reduce image degradation caused by re-sampling.
The second area where we plan to reduce computations is the replacement of the DFT with the DCT that is designed to be fed with the pure real data and so requires less arithmetic operations than DFT that processes complex input values.
Why “type IV” of the DCT?
Fig.1. Signal flow graph for DCT-IV
We already have
DCT type II implemented for the JPEG/JP4 compression, and we still needed another one. Type IV is used in audio compression because it can be converted to a
modified discrete cosine transform (MDCT) – a procedure when multiple overlapped windows are processed one at a time and the results are seamlessly combined without any block artifacts that are familiar for the JPEG with low settings of the compression quality. We too need lapped transform to process large images with relatively small (much smaller than the image itself) convolution kernels, and DCT-IV is a perfect fit. 8-point DCT-IV allows to implement transformation of 16-point segments with 8-point overlap in a reversible manner – the inverse transformation of 8-point data may be converted to 16-point overlapping segments, and being added together these segments result in the original data.
(more…)
