• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 57, Issue 14, 141010 (2020)
Yuzhen Liu1, Kaichen Chi1、*, and Sen Lin1、2、3
Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Electronic and Information Engineering, Liaoning Technical University, Huludao, Liaoning 125105, China
  • 2State Key Laboratory of Robotics, Shenyang Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang, Liaoning 110016, China
  • 3Institutes for Robotics and Intelligent Manufacturing, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang, Liaoning 110016, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP57.141010 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Yuzhen Liu, Kaichen Chi, Sen Lin. Underwater Image Restoration Based on Background Light Estimation and Transmittance Optimization[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2020, 57(14): 141010 Copy Citation Text show less
    Underwater optical imaging system
    Fig. 1. Underwater optical imaging system
    Comparison of algorithm results. (a) Non-red channel compensation image; (b) red channel compensation image; (c) figure (a) histogram; (d) figure (b) histogram
    Fig. 2. Comparison of algorithm results. (a) Non-red channel compensation image; (b) red channel compensation image; (c) figure (a) histogram; (d) figure (b) histogram
    Background light point extraction regions. (a) Highlight region; (b) flat region; (c) intersection region
    Fig. 3. Background light point extraction regions. (a) Highlight region; (b) flat region; (c) intersection region
    Transmittance images. (a) Original image; (b) backscatter component transmittance; (c) R channel direct component transmittance; (d) G channel direct component transmittance; (e) B channel direct component transmittance
    Fig. 4. Transmittance images. (a) Original image; (b) backscatter component transmittance; (c) R channel direct component transmittance; (d) G channel direct component transmittance; (e) B channel direct component transmittance
    Algorithm flow diagram
    Fig. 5. Algorithm flow diagram
    Color recovery experiment results. (a) Original image; (b) UDCP algorithm; (c) UGAN algorithm; (d) DUIENet algorithm; (e) fusion algorithm; (f) algorithm in Ref. [7]; (g) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 6. Color recovery experiment results. (a) Original image; (b) UDCP algorithm; (c) UGAN algorithm; (d) DUIENet algorithm; (e) fusion algorithm; (f) algorithm in Ref. [7]; (g) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of different color deviation experiments results. (a) Original image; (b) UDCP algorithm; (c) UGAN algorithm; (d) DUIENet algorithm; (e) fusion algorithm; (f) algorithm in Ref. [7]; (g) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 7. Comparison of different color deviation experiments results. (a) Original image; (b) UDCP algorithm; (c) UGAN algorithm; (d) DUIENet algorithm; (e) fusion algorithm; (f) algorithm in Ref. [7]; (g) proposed algorithm
    Comparison of different turbidity experiment results. (a) Original image; (b) UDCP algorithm; (c) UGAN algorithm; (d) DUIENet algorithm; (e) fusion algorithm; (f) algorithm in Ref. [7]; (g) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 8. Comparison of different turbidity experiment results. (a) Original image; (b) UDCP algorithm; (c) UGAN algorithm; (d) DUIENet algorithm; (e) fusion algorithm; (f) algorithm in Ref. [7]; (g) proposed algorithm
    Feature matching test results. (a) 1st group; (b) 2nd group; (c) 3rd group; (d) 4th group
    Fig. 9. Feature matching test results. (a) 1st group; (b) 2nd group; (c) 3rd group; (d) 4th group
    No.Original imageUDCPUGANDUIENetFusionRef. [7]Proposed
    10.66560.61590.68260.65330.65300.66960.7102
    20.51130.63010.64400.52160.59060.53750.6589
    30.48930.59060.59130.48780.57130.58990.6473
    40.41980.55850.50340.51000.58260.56870.6332
    50.48590.60280.59460.48040.59850.53180.6110
    60.51940.57550.58850.50920.61930.59590.6748
    Average0.51520.59560.60070.52710.60260.58220.6559
    Table 1. Evaluation values of UCIQE index
    No.Original imageUDCPUGANDUIENetFusionRef. [7]Proposed
    13.42902.84895.40065.08633.28822.79552.6430
    22.29812.39432.14562.143513.37252.14352.1417
    33.94143.45324.91354.23193.35073.25223.2152
    43.68253.25797.544218.88193.16392.99142.9401
    53.42503.20475.70494.88253.17913.06942.9555
    63.54703.45516.41324.88283.35173.08242.7889
    Average3.38723.10245.35376.68484.95102.88912.7807
    Table 2. Evaluation values of NIQE index
    Yuzhen Liu, Kaichen Chi, Sen Lin. Underwater Image Restoration Based on Background Light Estimation and Transmittance Optimization[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2020, 57(14): 141010
    Download Citation