1
$\begingroup$

I believe that they all do the same task of distributing the frequency of pixel intensities to a bigger range, but can these terms be used interchangeably?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

I believe that they all do the same task of distributing the frequency of pixel intensities to a bigger range

They do.

but can these terms be used interchangeably?

no, they can't. because the way they increase the dynamic range of the image diffears.

All this methods do a transformation of the pixel intensity $u$ of and image into a new pixel intensity $v$ $$v = f(u) $$ in order to improve the dynamic range of the image.

for constrast stretching (that as far as I know is a more general case of image normalization) the transformation is a piecewise linear function

$$ f(u) = \begin{cases} \alpha u & 0 \leq u < a \\ \beta(u - a) + v_a& a \leq u < b \\ \gamma(u - b) + v_b & b \leq u < L \end{cases}$$

Where L is the total number of gray levels.

On the other hand, Histogram equalization is a more powerful technique for image enhancement that aims to give the histogram of a given image the desired uniform shape. This is achieve by the transformation $$v_{aux} = F_u(u) = \sum_{i=0}^u p_u(i) $$

$$v = int\left( \frac{v_{aux} - v_{aux_{min}}}{1 - v_{aux_{min}}} (L-1) + 0.5 \right) $$

where $p_u(i) $ is the normalized value of the histogram at the grey level $i$

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.