Story of Two Bugs

I while back, I got a bug report for mahotas-imread [1]:

PNG reads in inverted: This image loads in imread 0.3.1 incorrectly. It looks right if I xor it with 255, but I don’t think that’s all that’s wrong.

im16_as8

The first thing I noticed was that this was a 16 bit image. If you’ve been coding for as long as I have, you’ll immediately think: It’s a byte-endiness issue [2]. So, I tested:

imshow(im.byteswap())

and saw the following:

byteswap0

Not good. The I looked at the hint that the original poster provided and it did seem to be true: imshow(~f) worked reasonably well. My working hypothesis was thus that there is a flag whereby the PNG data needs to be interpreted after a bit reversion. I also noticed another thing, though:

max_16bit_value = 2**16-1
imshow(max_16bit_value - f)

Also looks decent.

The TIFF format does allow you to specify whether zero is supposed to be white or black. Maybe PNG has a similar “feature.”

I read through the libpng documentation (which is not great), a bit through its source, and through online descriptions of PNG format. Along the way, I noticed that converting the image to TIFF (with ImageMagick) and loading it with imread also gave the wrong result. Perhaps the TIFF reader had the same bug or ImageMagick [3].

Eventually, I realised that PNG files are in network order (i.e., in big-endian format) and the code did not convert them to little-endian. Thus, my initial intuition had been right: it was a byte-swapping error!

But in this case, why did imshow(f.byteswap()) result in a mangled image?

I stated to suspect that matplotlib had a bug. I tried to do:

imshow(f.byteswap() / 2.**16)

and it resulted in the correct image being shown.

As it turned out, matplotlib does not do the right thing when given 16 bit files. Thus, I had this figured out. I fixed imread and released version 0.3.2 and closed the bug report.

§

A single bug is often easy to debug, but when you have multiple bugs interacting; it is much more than twice as hard.

§

Hairy details: You may want to stop reading now.

Consider the following identities:

255 == 0xff
-f == (f ^ 0xff + 1)
2**16 - f = -f + 2**16 == -f (because of overflow)

Thus, it should not be surprising that flipping the bits or subtracting the image resulted int , in two-bit complement, ~f is roughly -f. Not exactly, but similarly enough that, by eye, it is hard to tell apart.

Finally, it all makes sense when you realise that matplotlib assumes that non-8 bit images are floating point and does:

final_image = (input_image * 255)
final_image = final_image.astype(np.uint8)

Because what is multiplying by 255? It’s the same as multiplying by -1! Thus, matplotlib would multiply by -1 and then take the low order bits. Thus, it showed a correct image if you pre-multiplied it by -1 (or flipped the bits) and gave it a byteswapped image!

[1] People don’t always appreciate how valuable good bug reports are. Seriously, they are a huge help: you are testing the software for me. Unfortunately, either shyness or past bad experiences will often cause people who see something worng to not report it.
[2] I now have over 15 years of experience coding (having had a relative late start [I didn’t care much about computers until I was close to college age], I’ve caught up.) If there is an area where I really feel that my experience shines through is debugging: I’ve seen enough mistakes and errors that my guesses as to what the bug is are more and more accurate (this is true even in code I have not seen).
[3] One of the reasons I started mahotas-imread was that I had not found a single library that could read the formats I wanted without a lot of bugs. So, I trust no one on this. In this case, the paranoia was unwarranted, as we’ll see.
Advertisements

One thought on “Story of Two Bugs

  1. Pingback: Expiscor (4 November 2013): the obscure edition | Arthropod Ecology

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s