Here, we present several results obtained by ICA transformation on a selection of six typical or challenging painted scenes (called “panel” hereafter) of increasing complexity, and compare them with camera images, at both equivalent and very high resolution, processed with DStretch®. These comparisons present different situations for which hyperspectral images bring an improvement compared to RGB images as well as the type of new information which can be extracted.
The first result is that the ICA transformation concentrates most of the useful information contained in the selected 172 spectral channels into 6 to 12 components depending on the complexity of rock wall and painting in the image, with the different paintings typically decomposed into 3 to 7 different components. All the remaining components contained different types of noise sometimes with a few ones mixed with faint ghosts of rock wall or painting information.
3.1. Panel #1 : simple scene
In Figs 7 and 8, a typical simple case is presented: a single scene (panel #1) probably painted with a single pigment on a relatively smooth and homogeneous rock wall. Indeed, the ICA transformation of the hyperspectral image concentrates most of the painting information in a single component with only minor local variations depicted in two other components. Those components add little information, just a slightly different hue of pigment in the upper dog, which is confirmed by comparing average spectra of the different figures. When combined in a false color RGB image and compared to the RGB context image processed with DStretch®, it becomes clear that the hyperspectral data allows a better extraction of the spatial distribution of the pigment. Indeed, the main ICA component has a much higher contrast with less background noise than the corresponding component in the DStretched image. This can be highlighted by thresholding and stretching the green channel of the DStretched image in order to best select the pigment, i.e. removing as much noise as possible without removing pigment information, and comparing it with the same process applied to the main pigment ICA component (#1) (bottom of Fig. 7).
There is a noticeable gain in selectivity with the ICA component as witnessed, for example, by the better definition of the spokes of the wheel of the cart. This allows an easy pigment extraction, using only global image operations, and its superimposition on the original image (or on any other higher resolution RGB image) to restore the painting on the rock wall with a better, and possibly closer to initial contrast (Fig. 8).
A similar quality of pigment extraction can be achieved by using DStretch® and the same type of thresholding and stretching, but on a much higher resolution RGB image, such as the one in Fig. 9, with about 200 times higher resolution (one pixel in the hyperspectral data cube corresponds to about 14x14 pixels in this image).
3.2. Panel #2: Separation between a complex wall and pigments
Fig. 10 provides an example of an effective separation between a complex shelter wall and pigments, as well as discrimination between two overlapping paintings (panel #2). The two main paint components (ICA #1 & 5) are almost completely decorrelated, with only the seated character in the upper right quarter that appears in both components, but as a line drawing in component #5 and as a color filling in component #1. Two other components (#6 & 7) provide additional but more subtle information on the paintings with even fainter and noisier pigment information in component #9. The rock texture is mainly segregated in components #3 & #4. Component #2 is more difficult to interpret given its spatial distribution, but may represent either the remnant of an older painting, or a particular texture of the rock. All other components, #8, #10 and above, are dominated by noise.
Fig. 11 displays two end-member spectra of each of the two types of pigments identified, corresponding to ICA component #1 (dark red pigment) and #5 (orange pigment), as well as 2 typical spectra of the rock wall and one typical spectrum of the ICA component #2 of unknown origin. The spectral differences between them can be recognized, mostly with a stronger absorption below 580 nm and between 750 and 880 nm for pigments, but are relatively subtle especially if one restricts the spectra to the sensitivity range of digital cameras (typically 410-680 nm).
The spectrum of the uncertain ICA component #2 has a less pronounced absorption below 580 nm than the two pigments and most of the rock wall. It mostly occurs where the wall is brighter, but only on part of these brighter area. It may be either an area of ‘fresher’ less oxidized rock (scraped off?) or covered with a fainter pigment, but apparently covered by the other pigments.
The resulting synthetic ‘painting’ RGB image using the two main ICA paint components (#1 & #5), together with the secondary component #7, displays different pigments of the paintings much more clearly than the corresponding YWE DStretch® image (Fig. 10).
3.3. Panel #3: Highlighting invisible/barely-visible figures on complex rock wall
Another interesting example is a strongly oxidized brown-red wall with barely visible traces of red pigment on top of the image (panel #3, Fig. 12). The DStretch® (YUV) processing of the context RGB image allowed us to confirm the presence of several figures at the top of the image and possibly a bovine in the middle-left. The ICA analysis of the HSI image clearly displays these figures in components #2 and #7, but components #5 and #4 uncovered in a very clear way a few large anthropomorphic figures belonging to another layer of painting that is unobserved by eye. These figures remained undetected on the context RGB image despite a whole set of analysis attempts using various options of DStretch®, as well as different types of stretching algorithms (Photographic stretch, Saturation stretch, Decorrelation Stretch), transformation algorithms (PCA, ICA, MNF) and anomaly detection algorithms (RXD, UTD, RXD-UTD) available in ENVI software. Only the 'elongated head' of the main anthropomorph can be barely recognized a posteriori in some of these transformations. With the ICA of the HSI data the different types of rock texture and composition are also well separated in components #1, #3 and #6.
Even with a high resolution camera image (64 Mega-pixels) covering part of the hyperspectral dataset and processed with DStretch® (IDS) or the other algoritms we can hardly recognize some of the ‘anthropomorphs’ elements, even knowing where they should be located in this stretched image (Fig. 13). They only have a very slightly different orange hue in this stretched image compared to the surrounding oxidized rock with strongly variable hues.
A comparison of end-member spectra of the three main ICA components of panel #3 and of the rock wall (Fig. 14) shows only little variability between the pigments and the oxidized rock wall, in particular in the 400-600 nm range where the oxide absorptions are very similar among the spectra. The spectral features that should mainly contribute to the detection of the painting of the large anthropomorphs are most probably the slightly more marked shoulder around 590 nm and the flat part of their spectra between 770 and 850 nm which strongly contrasts with the steady spectral slope of the rock wall. Moreover, its separation from the other pigments occurs in the visible range (stronger slope and curvature between about 500 and 580 nm) where the anthropomorph’s pigment has a color and a spectrum very similar to the rock wall. This explains why an RGB camera cannot distinguish these figures from the oxidized background wall.
For a better assesment of the relative contributions of the visible and near-infrared regarding the figures versus the rock wall respectively, we performed ICA transformations on different spectral subsets of the HSI data, i.e. the visible spectrum only and the near-infrared spectrum only.
The transformation over the visible spectrum was limitated to the 93 spectral channels contained in the photopic sensitivity range of the human eye (420-675 nm, i.e. for sensitivity > 2% of its maximum [26]). While still clearly identifying the anthropomorph figures, their contrast with the surrounding is partly reduced and some small parts are missing (Fig. 15b). Other figures, such as the bovine in the middle left of the image and the series of characters above, are much less clearly detected using only the visible range (Fig. 15c,d).
The ICA transformation restricted to the near-infrared, performed over the 73 spectral channels of the 700-920 nm range, displays all painted figures in a single component with the anthropomorphs less sharply defined but containing the missing parts in the visible range, and with all the other painted figures with high contrast relative to the rock wall (Fig. 15e).
These tests show that the visible and near-infrared ranges contribute in different but complementary ways to enhancing the contrast and separation of the figures in the full spectrum result. The visible range appears to play a major role in the separation between different painted figures while the infrared range mostly boosts the contrast between the figures and the rock wall.
A final test, aimed at better understanding the limitation of RGB images in detecting very faint figures, was performed using only the three spectral channels corresponding to the RGB peak sensitivity wavelengths of either the eye (~421, 530, 558 nm) or the camera (~470, 530, 600 nm). In the case of the eye peak wavelengths the ICA transformation slightly highlights the anthropomorph figures (Fig. 15f), while in the case of the camera, only the serie of characters on top left of the image is highlighted. The large width (60-100nm) and strong overlap of the RGB sensitivity curves of the eye and of standard cameras with respect to the narrow spectral bands (7 nm wide) used here are most likely the main factors that prevent them from distinguishing pigments that have both close color and very low contrast.
3.4. Panel #4: Discovery of indistinguishable painting and separation of paint layers
An even more complex situation is represented by the hyperspectral image of panel #4, where a Barbary sheep is easily seen with naked eyes, as well as two greenish lines on the top left quarter of the image (Fig. 16, top left). Processing the RGB context image with DStretch® confirmed these observations but did not reveal more figures. The ICA analysis of the corresponding hyperspectral image (Fig. 16) reveals 3 superimposed paintings or drawings separated in 7 information components (#1 to #3, #5 to #7 & #9). In addition to a part of a second Barbary sheep on the right side of the image, the outline of a large anthropomorph, of which only the tail and part of the back are visible in the camera and DStretched images, now more fully appears all around the first Barbary sheep. However some parts of the contour lines of the anthropomorph are still hidden below the two Barbary sheeps making this outline very spotty at some places and surrounded by a variety of rock colors and more recent paintings. DStretch® cannot highlight it as its statistics for stretching focuses on the dominant colors of the image in terms of covered surface, i.e. the Barbary sheep painting and the highly variable rock wall colors.
The outine of the Barbary sheep is also well separated in the ICA components from its filling, probably drawn with another pigment or technique. All these paintings can be represented in a false color image by combining 3 of the ICA components (R=#3, G=#6, B=#9) (Fig. 16, bottom left). It shows that in addition to these main figures a few other painting, or part of paintings, are also present, such as a third horned ‘ghost’ left of the head of the first Barbary sheep (in green in bottom left image of Fig. 16), or additional lines above the back and below the right hand of the ‘siemen’ anthropomorph (in faint pink in bottom left image of Fig. 16).
There is also a ‘goat’ with thin horns and legs that looks like it is scraped on the rock (bright lines), partly over the Barbary sheep. It can be already guessed in the original context RGB image from some lines and area whiter than the rock and localy removing the pigments of the Barbary sheep (Fig. 16 top left). However, the ICA transformation extract its component with little contrast relative to the background. A MNF calculation was also run on this image, which provided a component with a better contrast and signal to noise ratio allowing us to better determine the outline of the ‘goat’. A false color RGB image of the 3 main MNF components (Fig. 16, bottom right) clearly shows the superimposition of the three paintings or drawings.
In the case of this panel the MNF transformation, although not efficiently separating the different pigments, provides interesting complementary results. In particular some of its components clearly display two or three of the supermimposed paintings, more efficiently cleaned from the complex rock texture (Fig. 17).
The MNF components can be an additional help to understand the paintings organisation and sequence, e.g. we can now spot a small figure behind the first Barbary sheep, inside the thigh of the anthropomorph, which is seen only in secondary painting components of the ICA (with fainter and noiser information) and thus not visible in the synthetic RGB images of the main painting, such as the two images at bottom of Fig. 16. A specific analysis of these secondary component is necessary to highlight this figure (Fig. 18) and the MNF component provides a slightly sharper view.
The shape of the end-member spectra collected for the main four pigments provides an overview on how they can be differentiated (Fig. 19). Again, the main spectral features that should allow to separate between these pigments are located in the 500-650 and 750-900 nm ranges. In particular, the shoulder around 580 nm for the anthropomorph is shifted up by about 20 nm for the Barbary sheep pigment, and in addition, it has a lower slope than typical surrounding rock below 500 nm and above 590 nm. So, contrary to the anthropomorph of panel #3, its pigment can be clearly differentiated from the others and from the surrounding rock by its color. It is indeed the superposition of the other two drawings and the overall complexity of this panel that makes the outline of the anthropomorph of panel #4 very difficult to perceive. The difficulty is here more a question of detectability of the discontinuous silhouette of the anthropomorph than of visibility of its pigments.
As for panel #3, we also tested the relative contributions of the visible and near-infrared ranges by performing ICA restricted on these two ranges (not displayed). In the case of panel #4 the different figures are readily separated using only the visible range, but the near-infrared seems to contribute better to recover the faintest paints with a more efficient separation from the rock wall.
The hyperspectral image presented above (Fig. 16-18) is part of a series of three images which cover a larger part of panel #4 and depicts several superimposed scenes painted with different styles when analyzed with ICA and subsequently projected (with 2D-spline adjustment on a large number, ~40, of common anchor points) and merged on a high-resolution image of the same rock wall (Fig. 20). As a first approach the ICA transformations were performed independently on the three hyperspectral images (with their own statistics) but they provided quite consistent components that can be easily matched.
The overall organization of this panel is very complex with numerous overlapping figures that probably belong to more than 3 layers. A complete analysis would need to also study in detail the other 5 components containing pigment information and displaying other fainter figures, but this is out of the scope of this paper. We can nevertheless point a few additional interesting results. In particular two other types of anthropomorphs, which can already be seen in the other parts of panel #4 in the DStretch® image (the Fig. 20 top right) are also well extracted and appear to be painted with a similar pigment as the first one. The ‘simen’ anthropomorph style, at the bottom part of the panel, is however only partly seen in the DStretched image, its head and back being hidden by a large rock scarp clearly visible in the bottom quarter of the RGB image (top-left of Fig.20). In contrast, the whole figure is well seen in the ICA component despite the interference of this large rock default.
3.5. Panel #5: the case of white painting
A known difficult case where DStretch® struggles to improve contrast is the presence of faint white paints, due to a lack of tint. We tested the detection and separation of faint white painting to assess if a VNIR HSI instrument can better extract such colorless pigment from the others and from the rock wall. Fig.21 shows a faded-out scene comprising a complex mixture of various pigment colors, including whitish (panel #5). The scene is decomposed in 4 main ICA components (#1, 3, 4, 6) for the pigments, the first one representing the whitish paint (Fig.21 top right), the second the upper left bovine and the two last ones the three other bovines. However, although component #1 clearly improves the visibility of the faintest white figures (see in particular the barely visible thin human figure close to the right edge, above a bovine), the contrast with the surrounding wall and the other paintings is not as sharp as that obtained in the previous panels for orange or red pigments. Also it does not significantly improve the visibility of the withish figures already visible with nacked eyes (see e.g. the second human figure from the right edge).
Comparison of the synthetic RGB image build using the 3 first painting ICA components (#1, 3, 4 - Fig.21 middle left) against the context image processed with DStretch® LAB (Fig.21 bottom left) shows that the ICA decomposition provides a significant contrast improvement of the faintest whitish pigments. We should note here that the specifically designed ‘white’ YWE and LWE DStretch® enhancements were not well working with this scene.
We then compared the spectra of the whitish human figures with the surrounding wall and the two types of bovine seen in the ICA components #3 and 4 (Fig. 22). We can see only little difference in spectrum shape of the two withish human figures with the nearby rock wall, especially for the faintest one which has its spectrum exactly overlaping that of one of the rock (grey spectrum) up to 560 nm and little departure (< 0.02 in reflectance) in the remaining visible range. The main difference with the underlying wall is a more pronounced shoulder around 580 nm leading to about 15-20% brighter reflectance in the very near infrared. These withish human figures are in fact not so white, but rather redish according to their spectra, but they look withish only by contrast because they are slightly brighter than the wall, especially figure #2, contrary to most red paints that are darker, as it is the case for the bovines. Part of the human figure #1 has color and visible brightness so close to the surrounding wall that only small dotted parts are visible by contrast to the eye. It has also a more redish color than figure #2 (slightly stronger spectral slope below 450 nm) as it also appears in the ICA component #4 which mostly depicts the light brown part of the bovine below (Fig. 21 bottom right). Some of the bovines are also difficult to discern with naked eyes due to very similar visible spectra of the surrounding wall (in particular, the one in the upper left quarter of the image), but they have clearly different spectral shapes outside the eye sensitive range, in particular between 680 and 900nm, which allow the ICA to extract them with a much sharper contrast with the rock (Fig. 21 midle and bottom right).
3.6. Panel #6: Separation of graffitis superimposed on paintings
A final example of the ability of VNIR hyperspectral imagery coupled with ACI transformation to separate different informations mixed together on the rock is the case of ‘modern art and poetry’ superimposed on neolithic painting.
Fig. 23 shows a painting ‘contaminated’ with several graffiti drawn with different materials and colors (panel #6). The ICA transformation of the hyperspectral image produces 12 significant components with information on the relatively complex painting (5 components: #5 to #9), the rock wall (3 components #3, #4, #10) and the graffiti (2 components #1, #11) as well as 2 components with mixed information (#2, #12).
When simulating a false color RGB image of the painting using three of the five components with relevant information, the graffiti can only be barely seen in the image (Fig.23, middle left), most of its information being concentrated in ICA component #1. The PCA transformation is found to be slightly less efficient to segregate the graffiti information in this hyperspectral dataset (Fig.23, bottom right), and a MNF transformation did not separate efficiently enough painting, rock and graffiti to be useful in that case. DStretch® applied on the RGB context image is also completely unable to remove the Graffiti (Fig.23, bottom left). At the opposite it has the tendency to highlight them to the detriment of the other colors.