English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper compares brightness preserving image enhancement techniques using bi-histogram equalization and tri-histogram equalization methods. Traditionally for image contrast enhancement, global histogram equalization technique is used extensively. However, global histogram equalization tends to change the mean brightness of any image to the middle gray level of the dynamic range, which often results in over or under enhancement and introduce some annoying artifacts. To overcome such problems, several bi-histogram based techniques and tri-histogram based technique has been proposed. While bi-histogram based techniques divides the histogram of any image into two subhistograms and equalize them independently, tri-histogram based technique divides the histogram into three sub histograms. This paper compares some of these equalization techniques. Simulation results can be quantitative and qualitative in nature. For quantitative analysis, Absolute Mean Brightness Error (AMBE) measurement has been used. And qualitative results can be observed from the image itself. General Terms Digital Image Processing, Computer Vision

A Comparative Study between Brightness Preserving Bi-histogram and Tri-histogram Equalization for Image Contrast Enhancement