Advertisement

Highlight Removal Using Shape-from-Shading

  • Hossein Ragheb
  • Edwin R. Hancock
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2351)

Abstract

One of the problems that hinders the application of conventional methods for shape-from-shading to the analysis of shiny objects is the presence of local highlights. The first of these are specularities which appear at locations on the viewed object where the local surface normal is the bisector of the light source and viewing directions. Highlights also occur at the occluding limb of the object where roughness results in backscattering from microfacets which protrude above the surface. In this paper, we consider how to subtract both types of highlight from shiny surfaces in order to improve the quality of surface normal information recoverable using shape-from-shading.

Keywords

Matte Image Photometric Stereo Iterate Conditional Mode Light Source Direction Lambertian Surface 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    P. Beckmann and A. Spizzochino, The Scattering of Electromagnetic Waves from Rough Surfaces, Pergamon, New York, 1963.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Besag, “On the statistical analysis of dirty pictures,” J. R. Statis. Soc. Lond. B, Vol. 48, pp. 259–302, 1986.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Bichsel and A.P. Pentland, “A Simple Algorithm for Shape from Shading,” CVPR, pp. 459–465, 1992.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Blake and H. Bulthoff, “Shape from Specularities: computation and psychophysics,” Phil Trans R. Soc. Lond. B, Vol. 331, pp. 237–252, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Brelstaff and A. Blake, “Detecting Specular Reflection Using Lambertian Constraints,” ICCV, pp. 297–302, 1988.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Dana, S. Nayar, B. Van Ginneken and J. Koenderink, “Reflectance and Texture of Real-World Surfaces,” CVPR, pp. 151–157, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F.P. Ferrie and J. Lagarde, “Curvature Consistency Improves Local Shading Analysis,” ICPR, Vol. I, pp. 70–76, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.T. Frankot and R. Chellappa, “A Method for Enforcing Integrability in Shape from Shading Algorithms,” ICCV, pp. 118–125, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G.H. Healey and T.O. Binford, “Local shape from specularity,” ICCV, pp. 151–160, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B.K.P. Horn and M. J. Brooks, “The Variational Approach to Shape from Shading,” CVGIP, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 174–208, 1986.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Kimmel and A.M. Bruckstein, “Tracking Level-sets by Level-sets: A Method for Solving the Shape from Shading Problem,” CVIU, Vol. 62, No. 1, pp. 47–58, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J.J. Koenderink, A.J. van Doorn and A.M.L. Kappers, “Surface Perception in Pictures,” Perception and Psychophysics, Vol. 52, No. 5, pp. 487–496, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C.C.J. Kuo and K.M. Lee, “Shape from Shading With a Generalized Reflectance Map Model,” CVIU, Vol. 67, No. 2, pp. 143–160, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Lin and S.W. Lee, “Estimation of Diffuse and Specular Appearance,” ICCV, pp. 855–860, 1999.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Magda, D. Kriegman, T. Zickler and P. Belhumeur, “Beyond Lambert: Reconstructing Surfaces with Arbitrary BRDFs,” ICCV, Vol. 2, pp. 391–399, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S.K. Nayar, K. Ikeuchi and T. Kanade, “Surface Reflection: Physical and Geometrical Perspectives,” PAMI, Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 611–634, 1991.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S.K. Nayar, X. Fang and T. Boult, “Removal of specularities using color and polarization,” CVPR, pp. 583–590, 1993.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Oliensis and P. Dupuis, “A Global Algorithm for Shape from Shading,” CVPR, pp. 692–701, 1993.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Oren and S.K. Nayar, “Generalization of the Lambertian Model and Implications for Machine Vision,” IJCV, vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 227–251, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    H. Ragheb, and E.R. Hancock, “Separating Lambertian and Specular Reflectance Components using Iterated Conditional Modes,” BMVC, pp. 541–552, 2001.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    P.T. Sander and S.W. Zucker, “Inferring surface trace and differential structure from 3D images,” PAMI, Vol. 12, No. 9, pp 833–854, 1990.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    H.D. Tagare and R.J.P. de Figueiredo, “A Theory of Photometric Stereo for a Class of Diffuse Non-Lambertian Surfaces,” PAMI, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 133–151, 1991.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    K. Torrance and E. Sparrow, “Theory for Off-Specular Reflection from Roughened Surfaces,” JOSA, Vol. 57, pp. 1105–1114, 1967.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    L.B. Wolff, “On The Relative Brightness of Specular and Diffuse Reflection,” CVPR, pp. 369–376, 1994.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    L.B. Wolff, S.K. Nayar and M. Oren, “Improved Diffuse Reflection Models for Computer Vision,” IJCV, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 55–71, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    P.L. Worthington and E.R. Hancock, “New Constraints on Data-closeness and Needle-map consistency for SFS,” PAMI, Vol. 21, No. 11, pp. 1250–1267, 1999.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    R. Zhang, P. Tsai, J.E. Cryer and M. Shah, “Shape from Shading: A Survey,” PAMI, Vol. 21, No. 8, pp. 690–706, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hossein Ragheb
    • 1
  • Edwin R. Hancock
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of YorkYorkUK

Personalised recommendations