Image Tampering Detection Based on Inherent Lighting Fingerprints

  • Manoj KumarEmail author
  • Sangeet Srivastava
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computational Vision and Biomechanics book series (LNCVB, volume 28)


Digital Imaging experienced unprecedented growth in the past few years with the increase in easily accessible handheld digital devices. This furthers the applications of digital images in many areas. With the amassed recognition and accessibility of low cost editing software, the integrity of images can be easily compromised. Recently, image forensics has gained popularity for such forgery detection. However, these techniques still lag behind to prove the authenticity of the images against counterfeits. Therefore, the issue of credibility of the images as a legal proof of some event or location become imperative. The proposed work showcases a state-of-the art forgery detection methodology based on the lighting fingerprints available within digital images. Any manipulation in the image(s) leaves dissimilar fingerprints, which can be used to prove the integrity of the images after the analysis. This technique performs various operations to obtain the intensity and structural information. Dissimilar features in an image are obtained using Laplacian method followed by surface normal estimation. Applying this information, source of the light direction is estimated in terms of angle \(\psi\). The proposed technique demonstrates an efficient tool of digital image forgery detection by identifying dissimilar fingerprints based on lighting parameters. Evaluation of the proposed technique is successfully done using CASIA1 image dataset.


Image tampering detection Lighting estimation Edge detection 


  1. 1.
    Gloe, T., Kirchner, M., Winkler, A., Böhme, R.: Can we trust digital image forensics. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, Augsburg, Germany, 25–29 September 2007Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ng, T.-T., Chang, S.-F., Lin, C.-Y., Sun, Q.: Passive-blind image forensic. In: Multimedia Security Technologies for Digital Rights Management, pp. 383–412. Academic Press (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kumar, M., Srivastava, S.: Identifying photo forgery using lighting elements. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 9(48), 1–5 (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Birajdar, G.K., Mankar, V.H.: Digital image forgery detection using passive techniques: a survey. Elsevier. Digit. Investig. 10(2013), 226–245 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fridrich, J., Soukal, D., Lukas, J.: Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images. In: International Proceedings of Digital Forensic Research Workshop (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Popescu, A., Farid, H.: Exposing digital forgeries by detecting duplicated image regions. Department of Computer Science, Dartmouth College (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Myna, A., Venkateshmurthy, M., Patil, C.: Detection of region duplication forgery in digital images using wavelets and log-polar mapping. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Intelligence (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang, W., Cao, X., Qu, Y., Hou, Y., Zhao, H., Zhang, C.: Detecting and extracting the photo composites using planar homography and graph cut. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 5(10), 544–555 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, Q., Cao, X., Deng, C., Guo, X.: Identifying image composites through shadow matte consistency. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 6(3), 1111–1122 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kakar, P., Sudha, N.: Exposing postprocessed copy-paste forgeries through transform-invariant features. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 7(3), 1018–1028 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yanga, F., Lia, J., Lu, W., Weng, J.: Copy-move forgery detection based on hybrid features. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 59, 73–83 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shen, X., Shi, Z., Chen, H.: Splicing image forgery detection using textural features based on the grey level co-occurrence matrices. IET Image Process. 11(1), 44–53 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Popescu, A.: Statistical tools for digital image forensics Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, Dartmouth College; Hanover (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang, J., Wang, H., Su, Y.: Detection of double-compression in JPEG2000 images for application in image forensics. J. Multimed. 4(6), 379–388 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bianchi, T., Piva, A.: Detection of non-aligned double JPEG compression with estimation of primary compression parameters. In: Proceeding of International Conference on Image Processing, (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bhartiya, G., Singh, J.: Forgery detection using feature-clustering in recompressed JPEG images. Multimed. Tools Appl. 75(20), 1–16 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tariang, D.B., Naskar, R.,: Re-compressed based JPEG forgery detection and localization through automated quality factor investigation. In: IEEE International Conference on Wireless Communications, Signal Processing and Networking (WiSPNET), Chennai (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kee, E., Johnson, M.K., Farid, H.: Digital image authentication from JPEG headers. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 6(3), 1066–1075 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnson, M., Farid, H.: Exposing digital forgeries by detecting inconsistencies in lighting. In: Proceeding of ACM Multimedia and Security Workshop (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johnson, M., Farid, H.: Exposing digital forgeries in complex lighting environments. In IEEE Transaction on Information Forensics Security, 3(2), 450–61 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peng, B., Wang, W., Dong, J., Tan, T.: Optimized 3D lighting environment estimation for image forgery detection. In: IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 12(2) (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Riess, C., Unberath, M., Sven, F.N., Stamminger, P. M., Angelopoulou, E.: Handling multiple materials for exposure of digital forgeries using 2-D lighting environments. Multimed. Tools Appl. 76(4), 4747–4764 Feb. (2017). doi:  10.1007/s11042-016-3655-0
  23. 23.
    Zhang, W., Cao, X., Zhang, J., Zhu, J., Wang, P.: Detecting photographic composites using shadows. In: IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    L. Yingda, X. Shen, C. Haipeng: An improved image blind identification based on inconsistency in light source direction. J. Super comput. 58(1), 50–67 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kee, J.O.H.F.E.: Exposing photo manipulation from shading and shadows. ACM Trans. Graph. 33(5), 1–21 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhu, Y., Huang, C.: An adaptive histogram equalization algorithm on the image gray level mapping. In: 2012 International Conference on Solid State Devices and Materials Science, Elsevier, Macao, (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Marr, D., Hildreth, E.: Theory of edge detection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biol. Sci. 207(1167), 187–217 Feb. 29 (1980)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dong, J., Wang, W.: [Online]. Available: (2009). Accessed 22 December 2016
  29. 29.
    Carvalho, T., Farid, H., Kee, E.: Exposing photo manipulation from user guided 3D lighting analysis. In SPIE Symposium on Electronic Imaging, San Francisco, CA (2015)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roy, A., Mitra, S., Agrawal, R.,: A novel method for detecting light source for digital images forensic. Opto−Electron 19(2), 211–218 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG  2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceThe Northcap UniversityGurugramIndia
  2. 2.Department of Applied ScienceThe Northcap UniversityGurugramIndia

Personalised recommendations