Estimating optical properties of layered surfaces using the spider model

Many object surfaces are composed of layers of different physical substances, known as layered surfaces. These surfaces, such as patinas, water colors, and wall paintings, have more complex optical properties than diffuse surfaces. Although the characteristics of layered surfaces, like layer opacity, mixture of colors, and color gradations, are significant, they are usually ignored in the analysis of many methods in computer vision, causing inaccurate or even erroneous results. Therefore, the main goals of this paper are twofold: to solve problems of layered surfaces by focusing mainly on surfaces with two layers (i.e., top and bottom layers), and to introduce a decomposition method based on a novel representation of a nonlinear correlation in the color space that we call the “spider” model. When we plot a mixture of colors of one bottom layer and n different top layers into the RGB color space, then we will have n different curves intersecting at one point, resembling the shape of a spider. Hence, given a single input image containing one bottom layer and at least one top layer, we can fit their color distributions by using the spider model and then decompose those layered surfaces. The last step is equivalent to extracting the approximated optical properties of the two layers: the top layer's opacity, and the top and bottom layers' reflections. Experiments with real images, which include the photographs of ancient wall paintings, show the effectiveness of our method.

[1]  Emil Wolf,et al.  Principles of Optics: Contents , 1999 .

[2]  Michael F. Cohen,et al.  An iterative optimization approach for unified image segmentation and matting , 2005, Tenth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV'05) Volume 1.

[3]  Shree K. Nayar,et al.  Vision in bad weather , 1999, Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[4]  L. Richards,et al.  Multiple scattering calculations for technology. , 1971, Applied optics.

[5]  P. Kubelka Ein Beitrag zur Optik der Farban striche , 1931 .

[6]  Michael Werman,et al.  Color lines: image specific color representation , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2004. CVPR 2004..

[7]  S. G. Narasimhan,et al.  Interactive Deweathering of An Image Using Physical Model , 2003 .

[8]  David Salesin,et al.  A Bayesian approach to digital matting , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2001.

[9]  Dani Lischinski,et al.  A Closed-Form Solution to Natural Image Matting , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[10]  Yoav Y. Schechner,et al.  Clear underwater vision , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2004. CVPR 2004..

[11]  Raanan Fattal,et al.  Single image dehazing , 2008, ACM Trans. Graph..

[12]  Beer Bestimmung der Absorption des rothen Lichts in farbigen Flüssigkeiten , 1852 .

[13]  Carlo Tomasi,et al.  Alpha estimation in natural images , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2000 (Cat. No.PR00662).

[14]  S. Nayar,et al.  Interactive ( De ) Weathering of an Image using Physical Models ∗ , 2003 .

[15]  G. Rybicki Radiative transfer , 2019, Climate Change and Terrestrial Ecosystem Modeling.

[16]  Robby T. Tan,et al.  Visibility in bad weather from a single image , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[17]  Jiaya Jia,et al.  Poisson matting , 2004, SIGGRAPH 2004.

[18]  Dani Lischinski,et al.  Spectral Matting , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[19]  Richard Szeliski,et al.  A Comparative Study of Energy Minimization Methods for Markov Random Fields , 2006, ECCV.

[20]  Harry Shum,et al.  Lazy snapping , 2004, ACM Trans. Graph..

[21]  Akira Ishimaru,et al.  Wave propagation and scattering in random media , 1997 .