The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Improving image quality in poor visibility conditions using a physical model for contrast degradation
Abstract
In daylight viewing conditions, image contrast is often significantly degraded by atmospheric aerosols such as haze and fog. This paper introduces a method for reducing this degradation in situations in which the scene geometry is known. Contrast is lost because light is scattered toward the sensor by the aerosol particles and because the light reflected by the terrain is attenuated by the aerosol. This degradation is approximately characterized by a simple, physically based model with three parameters. The method involves two steps: first, an inverse problem is solved in order to recover the three model parameters; then, for each pixel, the relative contributions of scattered and reflected flux are estimated. The estimated scatter contribution is simply subtracted from the pixel value and the remainder is scaled to compensate for aerosol attenuation. This paper describes the image processing algorithm and presents an analysis of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in the resulting enhanced image. This analysis shows that the SNR decreases exponentially with range. A temporal filter structure is proposed to solve this problem. Results are presented for two image sequences taken from an airborne camera in hazy conditions and one sequence in clear conditions. A satisfactory agreement between the model and the experimental data is shown for the haze conditions. A significant improvement in image quality is demonstrated when using the contrast enhancement algorithm in conjuction with a temporal filter.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Contrast restoration of weather degraded images
Narasimhan, S. G., & Nayar, S. K. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2003.1201821 · Cited by 1,642
Recovery of Underwater Visibility and Structure by Polarization Analysis
Schechner, Y. Y., & Karpel, N. (2005) · IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering · doi:10.1109/joe.2005.850871 · Cited by 688
Polarization-based vision through haze
Schechner, Y. Y., Narasimhan, S. G., & Nayar, S. K. (2003) · Applied Optics · doi:10.1364/ao.42.000511 · Cited by 687
Garg, K., & Nayar, S. K. (2007) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-006-0028-6 · Cited by 477
Fast Image Dehazing Method Based on Linear Transformation
Wang, W., Yuan, X., Wu, X., & Liu, Y. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2017.2652069 · Cited by 319
Metadata
- Authors
- Oakley, J. P., & Satherley, B. L.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 1998
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 167-179
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2123996346
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving image quality in poor visibility conditions using a physical model for contrast degradation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/83.660994
- The paper
- Oakley, J. P., & Satherley, B. L. (1998). Improving image quality in poor visibility conditions using a physical model for contrast degradation. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/83.660994
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.