Integrated Parallel 2D-Leap-Frog Algorithm for Noisy Three Image Photometric Stereo

In this paper a feasible computational scheme for reconstructing a smooth Lambertian surface $$S_L$$ from noisy images is discussed. The noiseless case of Photometric Stereo relies on solving image irradiance equations. In fact, the entire shape recovery consists of gradient computation and gradient integration. The presence of added noise re-transforms the latter depending on the adopted model into a high-dimensional linear or non-linear optimization, solvable e.g. by a 2D-Leap-Frog. This algorithm resorts to the overlapping local image snapshot optimizations to reduce a large dimension of the original optimization task. Several practical steps to improve the feasibility of 2D-Leap-Frog are integrated in this work. Namely, an initial guess is obtained from a linear version of denoising Photometric Stereo. A non-integrable vector field estimating the normals to $$S_L$$ is rectified first to yield an initial guess $$S_{L_a}\approx S_L$$ for a non-linear 2D-Leap-Frog. Computationally, the integrability of non-integrable normals is enforced here by Conjugate Gradient which avoids numerous inversions of the large size matrices. In sequel, $$S_{L_a}$$ is fed through to the adjusted version of non-linear 2D-Leap-Frog. Such setting not only improves the recovery of $$S_L$$ from $$S_{L_a}\approx S_L$$ to $$\hat{S}_{L_a}\approx S_L$$ but also it removes potential outliers upon enforcing a continuity on $$\hat{S}_{L_a}$$ occurring in the previous version of 2D-Leap-Frog. In addition, a speed-up of shape reconstruction is achieved with parallelization of non-linear 2D-Leap-Frog applied to the modified cost function. The experiments are performed on images with different resolutions and varying number of kernels. Finally, the comparison tests between standard 2D-Leap-Frog either linear or non-linear and its improved outlier-free version are presented illustrating differences in the quality of the reconstructed surface.

[1]  Ryszard Kozera,et al.  Uniqueness in Shape from Shading Revisited , 1997, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision.

[2]  Ryszard Kozera On Shape Recovery from Two Shading Patterns , 1992, Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell..

[3]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  Circularly symmetric eikonal equations and non-uniqueness in computer vision , 1992 .

[4]  Berthold K. P. Horn,et al.  Shape from shading , 1989 .

[5]  Rama Chellappa,et al.  A Method for Enforcing Integrability in Shape from Shading Algorithms , 1988, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[6]  W. Hackbusch Iterative Solution of Large Sparse Systems of Equations , 1993 .

[7]  Robert J. Woodham,et al.  Photometric method for determining surface orientation from multiple images , 1980 .

[8]  Yousef Saad,et al.  Iterative methods for sparse linear systems , 2003 .

[9]  Christian Whler 3D Computer Vision: Efficient Methods and Applications , 2009 .

[10]  Amitava Datta,et al.  A Parallel Leap-frog Algorithm for 3-Source Photometric Stereo , 2004, ICCVG.

[11]  Ryszard Kozera On complete integrals and uniqueness in shape from shading , 1995 .

[12]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  Impossible and ambiguous shading patterns , 2004, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[13]  John Oliensis,et al.  Uniqueness in shape from shading , 1991, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[14]  Felicja Okulicka-Dluzewska,et al.  Conjugate Gradient in Noisy Photometric Stereo , 2014, ICCVG.

[15]  Lyle Noakes,et al.  Nonlinearities and Noise Reduction in 3-Source Photometric Stereo , 2004, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision.

[16]  Rama Chellappa,et al.  Direct Analytical Methods for Solving Poisson Equations in Computer Vision Problems , 1990, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[17]  Lyle Noakes,et al.  2D leapfrog algorithm for optimal surface reconstruction , 1999, Optics & Photonics.

[18]  Berthold K. P. Horn Height and gradient from shading , 1989, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[19]  Alfred M. Bruckstein,et al.  Integrability disambiguates surface recovery in two-image photometric stereo , 1992, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[20]  Edwin R. Hancock,et al.  Imposing Integrability in Geometric Shape-from-Shading , 2003, CIARP.

[21]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  Direct computation of shape from shading , 1994, Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Pattern Recognition.

[22]  R. Kozera Existence and uniqueness in photometric stereo , 1991 .

[23]  Lyle Noakes,et al.  Denoising Images: Non-linear Leap-Frog for Shape and Light-Source Recovery , 2002, Theoretical Foundations of Computer Vision.

[24]  Reinhard Klette,et al.  On Depth Recovery from Gradient Vector Fields , 2007 .

[25]  Reinhard Klette,et al.  Lawn-mowing algorithm for noisy gradient vector fields , 1999, Optics & Photonics.

[26]  Norman E. Hurt,et al.  Mathematical methods in shape-from-shading: A review of recent results , 1991 .

[27]  R. K. Luneburg,et al.  Mathematical Theory of Optics , 1966 .

[28]  Lyle Noakes,et al.  The 2-D Leap-Frog: Integrability, Noise, and Digitization , 2000, Digital and Image Geometry.

[29]  L. Noakes A Global algorithm for geodesics , 1998, Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society. Series A. Pure Mathematics and Statistics.

[30]  Ryszard Kozera,et al.  Outlier Removal in 2D Leap Frog Algorithm , 2012, CISIM.