Advertisement

Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 76, Issue 24, pp 25851–25872 | Cite as

Multiscale Local Gabor Phase Quantization for image forgery detection

  • Meera Mary Isaac
  • M. Wilscy
Article

Abstract

Image Forgery is a field that has attracted the attention of a significant number of researchers in the recent years. The widespread popularity of imagery applications and the advent of powerful and inexpensive cameras are among the numerous reasons that have contributed to this upward spike in the reach of image manipulation. A considerable number of features – including numerous texture features – have been proposed by various researchers for identifying image forgery. However, detecting forgery in images utilizing texture-based features have not been explored to its full potential – especially a thorough evaluation of the texture features have not been proposed. In this paper, features based on image textures are extracted and combined in a specific way to detect the presence of image forgery. First, the input image is converted to YCbCr color space to extract the chroma channels. Gabor Wavelets and Local Phase Quantization are subsequently applied to these channels to extract the texture features at different scales and orientations. These features are then optimized using Non-negative Matrix Factorization (NMF) and fed to a Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier. This method leads to the classification of images with accuracies of 99.33%, 96.3%, 97.6%, 85%, and 96.36% for the CASIA v2.0, CASIA v1.0, CUISDE, IFS-TC and Unisa TIDE datasets respectively showcasing its ability to identify image forgeries under varying conditions. With CASIA v2.0, the detection accuracy outperforms the recent state-of-the-art methods, and with the other datasets, it gives a comparable performance with much reduced feature dimensions.

Keywords

Image forensics Gabor wavelets Local phase quantization Non-negative matrix factorization Support vector machine 

References

  1. 1.
    Al-Hammadi MH, Muhammad G, Hussain M, Bebis G (2013) Curvelet transform and local texture based image forgery detection. In: Advances in visual computing. Springer, pp 503–512Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alahmadi A, Hussain M, Aboalsamh H, Muhammad G, Bebis G et al (2013) Splicing image forgery detection based on dct and local binary pattern. In: Global conference on signal and information processing (GlobalSIP), 2013 IEEE. IEEE, pp 253–256Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alahmadi A, Hussain M, Aboalsamh H, Muhammad G, Bebis G, Mathkour H (2017) Passive detection of image forgery using dct and local binary pattern. SIViP 11(1):81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cattaneo G, Roscigno G (2014) A possible pitfall in the experimental analysis of tampering detection algorithms. In: 17th international conference on network-based information systems (NBiS), 2014. IEEE, pp 279–286Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cattaneo G, Roscigno G, Petrillo UF (2014) Experimental evaluation of an algorithm for the detection of tampered jpeg images. In: Information and communication technology-eurasia conference. Springer, pp 643–652Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chan CH, Kittler J, Poh N, Ahonen T, Pietikäinen M (2009) (Multiscale) Local phase quantisation histogram discriminant analysis with score normalisation for robust face recognition. In: IEEE 12th international conference on computer vision workshops (ICCV workshops), 2009. IEEE, pp 633–640Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chang CC, Lin CJ (2011) LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines. ACM Trans. Intell. Sys. Technol (TIST) 2(3):27Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dong J, Wang W (2011) CASIA tampered image detection evaluation (TIDE) database, v1.0 and v2.0Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dong J, Wang W, Tan T, Shi YQ (2009) Run-length and edge statistics based approach for image splicing detection. In: Digital watermarking. Springer, pp 76–87Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    El-Alfy E-SM, Qureshi MA (2015) Combining spatial and DCT based Markov features for enhanced blind detection of image splicing. Pattern Anal Applic 18(3):713–723MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farid H (2016) Photo tampering history. http://www.fourandsix.com/photo-tampering-history/ [Online; Accessed 26-July-2016]
  12. 12.
    Fridrich AJ, Soukal BD, Lukáš AJ (2003) Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images. In: Proceedings of digital forensic research workshop. CiteseerGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fu D, Shi YQ, Su W (2006) Detection of image splicing based on hilbert-huang transform and moments of characteristic functions with wavelet decomposition. In: Digital watermarking. Springer, pp 177–187Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    He Z, Lu W, Sun W, Huang J (2012) Digital image splicing detection based on markov features in dct and dwt domain. Pattern Recogn 45(12):4292–4299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hsu Y-F, Chang S-F (2006) Detecting image splicing using geometry invariants and camera characteristics consistency. In: IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo, 2006. IEEE, pp 549–552Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    IEEE Information forensics and security technical committee(IFS-TC) (2013) http://ifc.recod.ic.unicamp.br/fc.website/index.py?sec=0
  17. 17.
    Lee DD, Seung HS (2001) Algorithms for non-negative matrix factorization. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, pp 556–562Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee TS (1996) Image representation using 2d gabor wavelets. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 18(10):959–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li Y, Shan S, Zhang H, Lao S, Chen X (2013) Fusing magnitude and phase features for robust face recognition. In: Computer vision–ACCV 2012. Springer, pp 601–612Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lu C-S, Liao H-YM (2001) Multipurpose watermarking for image authentication and protection. IEEE Trans Image Process 10(10):1579–1592CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lu C-S, Liao H-YM (2003) Structural digital signature for image authentication: an incidental distortion resistant scheme. IEEE Trans Multimedia 5(2):161–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Muhammad G, Al-Hammadi MH, Hussain M, Bebis G (2014) Image forgery detection using steerable pyramid transform and local binary pattern. Mach Vis Appl 25(4):985–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ng T-T, Chang S-F (2004) A m digital watermarking, digital steganography, digital forensics, image processing, computer vision, information security, computer graphics, robot sensing, medical imaging, fuzzy logic, pattern recognition, neural networks, artificial intelligence, parallel processingodel for image splicing. In: International conference on image processing, 2004. ICIP’04. 2004, vol 2. IEEE, pp 1169–1172Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ng T-T, Chang S-F, Sun Q (2004) A data set of authentic and spliced image blocks. Columbia University, ADVENT Technical Report, pp 203–2004Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ojansivu V, Heikkilä J (2008) Blur insensitive texture classification using local phase quantization. In: Image and signal processing. Springer, pp 236–243Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Redi JA, Taktak W, Dugelay J-L (2011) Digital image forensics: a booklet for beginners. Multimedia Tools and Applications 51(1):133–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saleh SQ, Hussain M, Muhammad G, Bebis G (2013) Evaluation of image forgery detection using multi-scale weber local descriptors. In: Advances in visual computing. Springer, pp 416–424Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shi YQ, Chen C, Chen W (2007) A natural image model approach to splicing detection. In: Proceedings of the 9th workshop on multimedia & security. ACM, pp 51–62Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sutthiwan P, Shi YQ, Su W, Ng T-T (2010) Rake transform and edge statistics for image forgery detection. In: IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (ICME), 2010. IEEE, pp 1463–1468Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sutthiwan P, Shi Y, Zhao H, Ng T-T, Su W (2011) Markovian rake transform for digital image tampering detection. Transactions on data hiding and multimedia security VI, 1–17Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Venkatesh SK, Raghavendra R (2011) Local gabor phase quantization scheme for robust leaf classification. In: Third national conference on computer vision, pattern recognition, image processing and graphics (NCVPRIPG), 2011. IEEE, pp 211–214Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang W, Dong J, Tan T (2009) Effective image splicing detection based on image chroma. In: 16th IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), 2009. IEEE, pp 1257–1260Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wang W, Dong J, Tan T (2010) Image tampering detection based on stationary distribution of markov chain. In: 17th IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), 2010. IEEE, pp 2101–2104Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhao X, Li J, Li S, Wang S (2011) Detecting digital image splicing in chroma spaces. In: Digital watermarking. Springer, pp 12–22Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zhao X, Li S, Wang S, Li J, Yang K (2012) Optimal chroma-like channel design for passive color image splicing detection. EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing 2012(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zhou S-R, Yin J-P, Zhang J-M (2013) Local binary pattern (lbp) and local phase quantization (lbq) based on gabor filter for face representation. Neurocomputing 116:260–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhu X (2014) Face representation with local gabor phase quantization. J Networks 9(6):1617–1623CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of KeralaKeralaIndia

Personalised recommendations