Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

PSO.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

CS.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

The flow chart of the image processing method proposed in this article.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Improved CS.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Convergence rate analysis for platform limit parameter optimization using PSO, CS and improved CS.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Histogram segmentation.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Histogram clipping.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Parameter selection experiment.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 1.

Index values of images processed with different parameters.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 9.

Image texture adding effect comparison.

(a) Original image (b) Image processed by DHEDAPL (c) The image processed by DHEDAPL and adding detailed texture.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Image texture adding effect comparison.

(a) Image processed by DHEDAPL (b) Image processed by DHEDAPL adding unsharp mask (c) Image processed by DHEDAPL adding texture mask.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Table 2.

Average value of four evaluation indexes of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 11.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 1.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 2.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Fig 13.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 3.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 13 Expand

Fig 14.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 4.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 14 Expand

Fig 15.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 5.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 15 Expand

Fig 16.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 6.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 16 Expand

Fig 17.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 7.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 17 Expand

Fig 18.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 8.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 18 Expand

Fig 19.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 9.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 19 Expand

Fig 20.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 10.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 20 Expand

Fig 21.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 11.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 21 Expand

Fig 22.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 12.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 22 Expand

Fig 23.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 13.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 23 Expand

Fig 24.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 14.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 24 Expand

Fig 25.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 15.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 25 Expand

Fig 26.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 16.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 26 Expand

Fig 27.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 17.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 27 Expand

Fig 28.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 18.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 28 Expand

Fig 29.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 19.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 29 Expand

Fig 30.

Comparisons of the ten algorithms in enhancing low-light image 20.

(a) low-light image (b) AGCWD (c) Al-Ameen (d) BHE2PL (e) BIMEF (f) BPDHE (g) LIME (h) MSRCR (i) NPEA (j) SRIE (k) OURS (l) Normal light image.

More »

Fig 30 Expand

Table 3.

PSNR values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Average PSNR of two groups of images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

SSIM values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Average SSIM of two groups of images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Image information entropy values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Average Entropy of three groups of images.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Table 9.

Image average gradient values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 9 Expand

Table 10.

Average image average gradient values of three groups of images.

More »

Table 10 Expand

Table 11.

Image contrast ratio values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 11 Expand

Table 12.

Average image contrast ratio values of three groups of images.

More »

Table 12 Expand

Table 13.

Image brightness difference values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 13 Expand

Table 14.

Average image brightness difference values of three groups of images.

More »

Table 14 Expand

Fig 31.

20 random images with different method score line graphs for each index value.

More »

Fig 31 Expand

Table 15.

Image standard deviation values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 15 Expand

Table 16.

Average image standard deviation values of three groups of images.

More »

Table 16 Expand

Table 17.

NIQE values of 20 random images of MIT-5K.

More »

Table 17 Expand

Table 18.

Average NIQE values of three groups of images.

More »

Table 18 Expand