Scale invariance and noise in natural images

Natural images are known to have scale invariant statistics. While some eariler studies have reported the kurtosis of marginal bandpass filter response distributions to be constant throughout scales, other studies have reported that the kurtosis values are lower for high frequency filters than for lower frequency ones. In this work we propose a resolution for this discrepancy and suggest that this change in kurtosis values is due to noise present in the image. We suggest that this effect is consistent with a clean, natural image corrupted by white noise. We propose a model for this effect, and use it to estimate noise standard deviation in corrupted natural images. In particular, our results suggest that classical benchmark images used in low-level vision are actually noisy and can be cleaned up. Our results on noise estimation on two sets of 50 and a 100 natural images are significantly better than the state-of-the-art.

[1]  J. V. van Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[2]  Daniel L. Ruderman,et al.  Origins of scaling in natural images , 1996, Vision Research.

[3]  M. Bethge.  Factorial coding of natural images: how effective are linear models in removing higher-order dependencies? , 2006, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[4]  Michael J. Black,et al.  Fields of Experts: a framework for learning image priors , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[5]  R. Unbehauen,et al.  Estimation of image noise variance , 1999 .

[6]  Frédo Durand,et al.  Image and depth from a conventional camera with a coded aperture , 2007, ACM Trans. Graph..

[7]  Richard Szeliski,et al.  Submitted to Ieee Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence Automatic Estimation and Removal of Noise from a Single Image , 2022 .

[8]  Joseph W. Goodman,et al.  A mathematical analysis of the DCT coefficient distributions for images , 2000, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[9]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  On Advances in Statistical Modeling of Natural Images , 2004, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision.

[10]  W. B. Collis,et al.  Training Methods for Image Noise Level Estimation on Wavelet Components , 2004, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[11]  Aleksandra Pizurica,et al.  Noise estimation for video processing based on spatio-temporal gradients , 2006, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[12]  William Bialek,et al.  Statistics of Natural Images: Scaling in the Woods , 1993, NIPS.

[13]  Ram M. Narayanan,et al.  Noise estimation in remote sensing imagery using data masking , 2003 .

[14]  William T. Freeman,et al.  What makes a good model of natural images? , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[15]  Shree K. Nayar,et al.  What is the space of camera response functions? , 2003, 2003 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2003. Proceedings..

[16]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  A database of human segmented natural images and its application to evaluating segmentation algorithms and measuring ecological statistics , 2001, Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. ICCV 2001.

[17]  William T. Freeman,et al.  Comparison of graph cuts with belief propagation for stereo, using identical MRF parameters , 2003, Proceedings Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[18]  Michael J. Black,et al.  On the Spatial Statistics of Optical Flow , 2005, Tenth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV'05) Volume 1.