IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING.
VOL. 5. NO. 1. JANUARY 1996
A Note on Lena
During my term as Editor-in-Chief, I was approached a number of times with
the suggestion that the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING should
consider banning the use of the image of Lena. For those of you who are
uninitiated in this brouhaha, let me provide a few facts. The original
Lena image was a photograph of a Swedish woman named Lena Sjooblom, which
appeared in the November 1972 issue of Playboy Magazine. (In English,
Lena is sometimes spelled Lenna, to encourage proper pronunciation.) The
image was later digitized at the University of Southern California as one
of many possible images for use by the research community. I think it is
safe to assume that the Lena image became a standard in our "industry" for
two reasons. First, the image contains a nice mixture of detail, flat
regions, shading, and texture that do a good job of testing various image
processing algorithms. It is a good test image! Second, the Lena image is
a picture of an attractive woman. It is not surprising that the (mostly
male) image processing research community gravitated toward an image that
they found attractive. The Woody Allen buffs among you may be interested
to know that the Lena image appeared in the movie Sleeper. Tom Huang
pointed this out to me. In the scene where Allen awakes in the year 2173,
he is asked to identify a number of artifacts from the past, including
photographs of Joseph Stalin and Charles de Gaulle, and the issue of
Playboy Magazine containing Lena. The view to the movie watcher is
fleeting and somewhat unclear, but this is the closest I have come to
viewing the original image. From second-hand reports from Sweden, I am
told that Lena is living in a small town south of Stockholm. She is said
to be quite amazed that her image has become a standard in the research
community. In recent years, Playboy Enterprises was giving thought to
enforcing their copyright on the Lena image (see Brian Thompson's
editorial in the January 1992 issue of Optical Engineering). It appears,
though, that this is no longer the case.
So what is the problem? Well, quite understandably, some members of our
community are unhappy with the source of the Lena image. I am sympathetic
to their argument, which states that we should not use material from any
publication that is seen (by some) as being degrading to women. I must
tell you, though, that within any single segment of our community (e.g.,
men, women, feminists), there is a complete diversity of opinion on the
Lena issue. You may be surprised to know that most persons who have
approached me on this issue are male. On the other hand, some informal
polling on my part suggests that most males are not even aware of the
origin of the Lena image! I have heard feminists argue that the image
should be retired. However, I just recently corresponded with a feminist
who had a different point of view. She was familiar with the Lena image,
but she had not imagined that there could be any controversy. When I
offered an explanation of why some persons are offended by the use of the
image. she responded tartly. A watered-down version of her reply is,
"There isn't much of Lena showing in the Lena image. This political
correctness stuff infuriates me!"
So there you have it. Much of our community is blind to the fact (until
now!) that there is a controversy. Among those who are "tuned in," there
is vigorous disagreement. As Editor-in-Chief, I did not feel that this
issue warranted the imposition of censorship, which, in my view, should be
applied in only the most extreme circumstances. In addition, in
establishing the precedent, I was not sure where this might lead. Should
we ban the Cheerleader video sequence? Should we establish an oversight
panel to rule on acceptable imagery? Instead, I opted to wait and see how
the situation might develop. I suspected that the use of Lena would
decline naturally. as diverse imagery became more widely available and as
the field of image processing broadened in scope. Although the use of
Lena has declined (witness our January, 1992 issue!), this image still
appears so frequently that I imagine it must be grating on those who
oppose its use. What to do? I favor a compromise of sons. I suggest that
the IP authorship be more sensitive to the feelings of those who are
offended by the Lena image. In cases where another image will serve your
purpose equally well, why not use that other image? After all, why
needlessly upset colleagues? And who knows? We may even devise image
compression schemes that work well across a broader class of images,
instead of being tuned to Lena!
DAVID C. MUNSON, JR.
Editor-in-Chief, Emeritus
_________________________________________________________
I was gratified to note that there were at least three articles in that
issue of Tr. Img Proc. with Lena test image! There was also more using
The Photographer, maybe we should start a legend that the Photographer
was photographing Lena at the Bridge............ ;')