Xiaochuan Li, Guihua Liu, Ling Cao, Lei Deng. Restoration Algorithm for Honeycomb Artifacts Based on Optical Fiber Imaging[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2023, 60(12): 1210010

Search by keywords or author
- Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
- Vol. 60, Issue 12, 1210010 (2023)

Fig. 1. Imaging optical fiber bundle. (a) Schematic of the overall structure; (b) schematic of monofilament optical fiber structure

Fig. 2. Optical fiber image beam imaging. (a) Imaging image; (b) pixel distribution

Fig. 3. Schematic of proposed algorithm structure

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of image split

Fig. 5. Pixel value distribution before and after split

Fig. 6. Comparison of pixel value distribution before and after processing

Fig. 7. Effect after adding honeycomb artifacts. (a) Clean image captured by industrial camera; (b) interference image obtained by simulation
![Comparison of artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment A. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 8. Comparison of artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment A. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Comparison of artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment B. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 9. Comparison of artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment B. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Comparison of real artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment C. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 10. Comparison of real artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment C. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Comparison of real artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment D. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 11. Comparison of real artifact removal results of honeycomb in experiment D. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Environment with white light illumination and light intensity of 100 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 12. Environment with white light illumination and light intensity of 100 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Environment with white light illumination and light intensity of 150 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 13. Environment with white light illumination and light intensity of 150 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Environment with blue light illumination and light intensity of 150 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 14. Environment with blue light illumination and light intensity of 150 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
![Environment with green light illumination and light intensity of 150 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method](/Images/icon/loading.gif)
Fig. 15. Environment with green light illumination and light intensity of 150 lx. (a) Interfered graph; (b) mean filtering; (c) method in Ref.[11]; (d) method in Ref.[5]; (e) method in Ref.[15]; (f) method in Ref.[6]; (g) guided filtering; (h) proposed method
|
Table 1. Related parameters of imaging optical fiber bundle
|
Table 2. Quantitative index for removal results of honeycomb artifacts

Set citation alerts for the article
Please enter your email address