ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

Journal of Microscopy

Journal of Microscopy

Volume 225 Issue 1, Pages 104 - 107

Published Online: 2 Feb 2007

Journal compilation © 2010 Royal Microscopical Society



< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 204K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

Letter to the Editor
Comments on the paper 'A novel 3D wavelet-based filter for visualizing features in noisy biological data', by Moss et al.
C. L. LUENGO HENDRIKS* & D. W. KNOWLES*
  *Life Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, One Cyclotron Road, mailstop 84R171, Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.
 Correspondence to: C. L. Luengo Hendriks. Tel: +1-510-4865359; fax: +1-510-4865730; e-mail: clluengo@lbl.gov
Copyright 2007 The Royal Microscopical Society. No claim to original US government works
KEYWORDS

Summary

AbstractMethodMoss' wavelet-based filterThe Laplace operatorThe difference of uniform filtersReferences

Moss et al. (2005) describe, in a recent paper, a filter that they use to detect lines. We noticed that the wavelet on which this filter is based is a difference of uniform filters. This filter is an approximation to the second-derivative operator, which is commonly implemented as the Laplace of Gaussian (or Marr–Hildreth) operator. We have compared Moss' filter with (1) the Laplace of Gaussian operator, (2) an approximation of the Laplace of Gaussian using uniform filters and (3) a few common noise reduction filters. The Laplace-like operators detect lines by suppressing image features both larger and smaller than the filter size. The noise reduction filters only suppress image features smaller than the filter size. By estimating the signal-to-noise ratio and mean square difference of the filtered results, we found that the filter proposed by Moss et al. does not outperform the Laplace of Gaussian operator. We also found that for images with extreme noise content, line detection filters perform better than the noise reduction filters when trying to enhance line structures. In less extreme cases of noise, the standard noise reduction filters perform significantly better than both the Laplace of Gaussian and Moss' filter.


Received 28 September 2005; accepted 27 March 2006

DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1365-2818.2007.01733.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


Sign-up for Content Alerts
Editor's Choice
First Impact Factor
Laser & Photonics Reviews

Laser & Photonics Reviews

Excellent first Impact Factor:

          4.357*

It makes it right from the start the #2 journal in Optics and immediately positions it as one of the Top 10 journals in both categories, Condensed Matter and Applied Physics.

* 2008 Journal Citation Reports® (Thomson Reuters, 2009)

Go to the journal

Sign up for Content Alerts