Competing algorithms for SNR of a image. Which is better?
2 次查看(过去 30 天)
显示 更早的评论
Is either of these methods preferable to the other for finding SNR of a image?
Method 1:
signalImage1 = double('crop image of L2S11.png');
noisyImage = imnoise(signalImage1,'salt & pepper',0.02);
noiseOnlyImage = double(noisyImage) - signalImage1;
SNR = mean2(signalImage1 ./ noiseOnlyImage );
Method 2:
m=mean2('crop image of L2S11.png');
d=double('crop image of L2S11.png');
sd=std(sd);
SNR=m/sd;
Method 3:(this is giving answer in double)
I=imread('crop image of L2S11.png');
sd=im2double(I);
m=mean2('crop image of L2S11.png');
sd1=std(sd);
SNR=m/sd1;
0 个评论
回答(1 个)
Jonas Reber
2011-6-15
I would go for method 2 (3 is the same?) but wouln't one calculate SNR = mean2(im)/std(im(:))?
2 个评论
Jonas Reber
2011-6-15
If I do the following:
i = imread('cameraman.tif'); % load sample image
imd = im2double(i);
imdd = double(i);
snr1 = mean2(imd)./std(imd(:));
snr2 = mean2(imdd)./std(imdd(:));
I twice (snr1 and snr2) get 1.9044, don't you?
另请参阅
类别
在 Help Center 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Image Processing Toolbox 的更多信息
产品
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting!