Quality is a very important parameter for all objects and their functionalities. In image-based object recognition, image quality is a prime criterion. For authentic image quality evaluation, ground truth is required. But in practice, it is very difficult to find the ground truth. Usually, image quality is being assessed by full reference metrics, like MSE (Mean Square Error) and PSNR (Peak Signal to Noise Ratio). In contrast to MSE and PSNR, recently, two more full reference metrics SSIM (Structured Similarity Indexing Method) and FSIM (Feature Similarity Indexing Method) are developed with a view to compare the structural and feature similarity measures between restored and original objects on the basis of perception. This paper is mainly stressed on comparing different image quality metrics to give a comprehensive view. Experimentation with these metrics using benchmark images is performed through denoising for different noise concentrations. All metrics have given consistent results. However, from representation perspective, SSIM and FSIM are normalized, but MSE and PSNR are not; and from semantic perspective, MSE and PSNR are giving only absolute error; on the other hand, SSIM and PSNR are giving perception and saliency-based error. So, SSIM and FSIM can be treated more understandable than the MSE and PSNR.
References
[1]
Thung, K.-H. and Raveendran, P. (2009) A Survey of Image Quality Measures. IEEE Technical Postgraduates (TECHPOS) International Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 14-15 December 2009, 1-4.
[2]
Oszust, M. (2016) Full-Reference Image Quality Assessment with Linear Combination of Genetically Selected Quality Measures. Yongtang Shi, Nankai University, China, Vol. 11, No. 6, June 24.
[3]
Wang, Z. and Simoncelli, E.P. (2005) Reduced-Reference Image Quality Assessment Using A Wavelet-Domain Natural Image Statistic Model. Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X, Proc. SPIE, Vol. 5666, San Jose, CA, 18 March 2005. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.597306
[4]
Lahoulou, A., Larabi, M.C., Beghdadi, A., Viennet, E. and Bouridane, A. (2016) Knowledge-Based Taxonomic Scheme for Full-Reference Objective Image Quality Measurement Models. Journal of Imaging Science and Technology, 60, 1-15.
[5]
Wang, Z. and Sheikh, H.R. (2004) Image Quality Assessment: From Error Visibility to Structural Similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 13, No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2003.819861
[6]
Søgaard, J., Krasula, L., Shahid, M., Temel, D., Brunnstrom, K. and Razaak, M. (2016) Applicability of Existing Objective Metrics of Perceptual Quality for Adaptive Video Streaming. Society for Imaging Science and Technology IS&T International Symposium on Electronic Imaging.
[7]
Mean Squared Error. https://math.tutorvista.com/statistics/mean-squared-error.html
[8]
Deshpande, R.G., Ragha, L.L. and Sharma, S.K. (2018) Video Quality Assessment through PSNR Estimation for Different Compression Standards. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 11, 918-924.
[9]
Wang, Z., Simoncelli, E.P. and Bovik, A.C. (2004) Multiscale Structural Similarity for Image Quality Assessment. Conference Record of the Thirty-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, 2, 1398-1402.
[10]
Dosselmann, R. and Yang, X.D. (2011) A Comprehensive Assessment of the Structural Similarity Index. Signal, Image and Video Processing, 5, 81-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11760-009-0144-1
[11]
Li, C.F. and Bovik, A.C. (2009) Three-Component Weighted Structural Similarity Index. Image Quality and System Performance VI, SPIE Proc. 7242, San Jose, CA, 19 January 2009, 1-9.
[12]
Brooks, A.C., et al. (2008) Structural Similarity Quality Metrics in a Coding Context: Exploring the Space of Realistic Distortions. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 17, 1261-1273. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2008.926161
[13]
Kumar, R. and Moyal, V. (2013) Visual Image Quality Assessment Technique Using FSIM. International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research, 2, 250-254. https://doi.org/10.7753/IJCATR0203.1008
