which imshow is true?

Hello. I have an image that i add some noise to it. finally i want to show it with imshow.i use two syntax but i dont know which one is right? here is my code:

    % 2nd way b
    clear all;
    close all;
    clc;

    I=im2double(imread ('cameraman.tif'));
    size_I=size(I);

    %%adding noises
    %adding quantization noise
    thresh = multithresh(I,7);
    valuesMax = [thresh max(I(:))];
    [quant8_I_max,~] = imquantize(I,thresh,valuesMax);

    %speckle noise
    SI=imnoise(I,'speckle',0.2);

    % adding salt and pepper noise or shot noise
    Shot_noise = imnoise(I, "salt & pepper", 0.20);

    %adding background noise
    mean=0.5953;
    BG = poissrnd(mean, size_I);
    BGR=I+BG;
    BGR=BGR./max(BGR);

    % total noise
    noisy_image=I+quant8_I_max+SI+Shot_noise+BGR;

    figure
    imshow(I);
    title('Original Image')

    figure
    subplot(121)
    imshow(noisy_image,[])
    title("noisy image show with []");

    subplot(122)
    imshow(noisy_image)
    title("noisy image show without []");

[Stephen23]

Do you want to scale the image to its maximum and minimum values, or not? Only you know what your intent is.

Answer 1

[DGM]

Tools like imshow() and imwrite() expect image data to be scaled according to class-dependent limits. For floating-point image data, black is 0, white is 1. For integer images, black and white correspond to the minimum and maximum values that the integer class can represent.

You're taking five floating point images and adding them together. The result spans (approximately) [0 5]. What will imshow() do with this if it thinks 1 is white? The answer is that most of the data is treated as white.

Will normalizing the data to the extrema give a viewable image? Yes. Is that the appropriate result? Maybe.

If it were me, I'd just divide the image sum by 5. That way the relative range of the image doesn't get stretched.

Consider the example using a source image that has less range:

I=im2double(imread ('pout.tif'));
size_I=size(I);

%%adding noises
%adding quantization noise
thresh = multithresh(I,7);
valuesMax = [thresh max(I(:))];
[quant8_I_max,~] = imquantize(I,thresh,valuesMax);

%speckle noise
SI=imnoise(I,'speckle',0.2);

% adding salt and pepper noise or shot noise
Shot_noise = imnoise(I, "salt & pepper", 0.20);

%adding background noise
mean=0.5953;
BG = poissrnd(mean, size_I);
BGR=I+BG;
BGR=BGR./max(BGR);

% total noise
noisyimg_sum = I+quant8_I_max+SI+Shot_noise+BGR;
noisyimg_avg = noisyimg_sum/5;

subplot(121)
imshow(noisyimg_sum,[])
title("noisy image sum with []");
subplot(122)
imshow(noisyimg_avg)
title("noisy image average");

Using the displayrange parameter with imshow distorts the image range and shows it having more contrast than it actually has.

The question should be whether the average of these images with noise applied is meaningful. I would imagine that what's intended is not the sum or average, but the composition of noise functions. In other words, each call to imnoise() should operate on the result from the prior call to imnoise(). That way the noise contribution doesn't get multiplied by 1/5. In that case, the final result will be within the proper range for the class and this whole rescaling question will be moot.