Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

about Rain100L dataset #21

Open
jimmy820904 opened this issue Apr 19, 2020 · 5 comments
Open

about Rain100L dataset #21

jimmy820904 opened this issue Apr 19, 2020 · 5 comments

Comments

@jimmy820904
Copy link

Hi. Does Rain100L training dataset only has 200 images?
Rain100L in other paper seems to have 1800 images for training.
Does this problem affect the experimental results?

@csdwren
Copy link
Owner

csdwren commented Apr 19, 2020

The authors of Rain100H and Rain100L have updated the datasets. This paper is based on the original datasets.
For the results on new datasets of Rain100H and Rain100L, please refer to https://github.com/csdwren/RecDerain (RainHeavy* and RainLight*)

@csdwren
Copy link
Owner

csdwren commented Apr 19, 2020

3
4

@jimmy820904
Copy link
Author

The authors of Rain100H and Rain100L have updated the datasets. This paper is based on the original datasets.
For the results on new datasets of Rain100H and Rain100L, please refer to https://github.com/csdwren/RecDerain (RainHeavy* and RainLight*)

Thanks for your reply!
I have another question.
If I want to get a good deraining result, I should put the three datasets together for trainging, right?

@csdwren
Copy link
Owner

csdwren commented Apr 19, 2020

(1) For the individual training dataset, the model fully trained for Rain100L or RainLight* has the best generalization ability to real rainy images.

(2) As for the PReNet for real images, I put the three datasets together. But Rain1400 dataset has much more images than the other two. So when preprocessing, the stride for extracting training patches from Rain1400 is larger. Overall Rain100H plays the more important role, but it is quite different from real rain streaks. I found PReNet trained after 1 epoch has better generalization ability for real images than the model trained after 100 epoches. That is, PReNet after 100 epoches is overfitted to training dataset. PReNet after 1 epoch can better remove rain streaks, but the deraining images are likely to be over-smoothed with less textures. I do not compare the model with (1). Maybe (1) is better.

@jimmy820904
Copy link
Author

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants