Skip to main content

Remove static objects from an image sequence


Is it possible to remove static objects/pixels from a sequence of images?


Lets say I have a black square in the middle of my white picture (white background) and a black circle is orbiting around it. The result would be that my images will only contain the moving black circle from frame to frame and that the static black square would be colored white and though "removed".


My example would be something like this:


Manipulate[Graphics[{
   Opacity[0], Rectangle[{-1.1, -1.1}, {1.1, 1.1}],
   Opacity[1], Rectangle[{-.5, -.5}],
   Disk[{Cos[p], Sin[p]}, .1]
   }], {p, 0, 2 Pi}]


Which gives this image sequence


enter image description here


My first thoughts were going to something like that "put a circle around a cell"-thing with which one could identify not moving cells by looking at the static positions of the targeted cells positions. But I don't have enough expertise in that to manage this problem by myself right now.


Another thing that I came up now was the possibility to create a table with all images of my sequence, turn the images into tables with ImageData and calculate the Mean of each pixels RGB value which then gives me the information if the pixel was black or white all time or if it wasn't. But that explodes my RAM. Maybe there is a better solution?



Answer



Essentially you want to find all pixels that are black in all images. I turned the color around so that the goal became to find the pixels that are white in all images. Now 0x0=0, 1x0=0 and 1x1=1, so what I would propose is to multiply all images in the animation with each other. Afterwards I use ColorNegate to get back your configuration with a white background and black foreground.


img[p_] := Graphics[{
   White, Rectangle[{-.5, -.5}],
   Disk[{Cos[p], Sin[p]}, .1]
   },

  Background -> Black,
  PlotRange -> {{-1.1, 1.1}, {-1.1, 1.1}}
  ]

ColorNegate@Fold[ImageMultiply[#, img@#2] &, img[0], Range[0.05, 2 Pi, 0.05]]

Now that we have the background we can use ImageSubtract to remove it. You mentioned problems with memory which is why I generate each frame only when I need it, so only one image is in the memory at a time. You should know however that this is probably a lot slower than to generate all images first; ImageMultiply can work on an arbitrary number of images simutaneously and will work much faster if you let it. You should at least consider if you can multiply the images in batches.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more