Objective measures for quality assessment of automatic skin enhancement algorithms

Automatic portrait enhancement by attenuating skin flaws (pimples, blemishes, wrinkles, etc.) has received considerable attention from digital camera manufacturers thanks to its impact on the public. Subsequently, a number of algorithms have been developed to meet this need. One central aspect to developing such an algorithm is quality assessment: having a few numbers that precisely indicate the amount of beautification brought by an algorithm (as perceived by human observers) is of great help, as it works on circumvent time-costly human evaluation. In this paper, we propose a method to numerically evaluate the quality of a skin beautification algorithm. The most important aspects we take into account and quantize to numbers are the quality of the skin detector, the amount of smoothing performed by the method, the preservation of intrinsic skin texture, and the preservation of facial features. We combine these measures into two numbers that assess the quality of skin detection and beautification. The derived measures are highly correlated with human perception, therefore they constitute a helpful tool for tuning and comparing algorithms.

[1]  Franco Oberti,et al.  A new sharpness metric based on local kurtosis, edge and energy information , 2004, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[2]  Dong-Chen He,et al.  Texture Unit, Texture Spectrum, And Texture Analysis , 1990 .

[3]  Patrick Le Callet,et al.  Objective quality assessment of color images based on a generic perceptual reduced reference , 2008, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[4]  Heng Liu,et al.  Portrait beautification: A fast and robust approach , 2007, Image Vis. Comput..

[5]  Dani Lischinski,et al.  Data-driven enhancement of facial attractiveness , 2008, ACM Trans. Graph..

[6]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Video quality assessment based on structural distortion measurement , 2004, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[7]  Xuelong Li,et al.  A natural image quality evaluation metric , 2009, Signal Process..

[8]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Texture Analysis , 2018, Handbook of Image Processing and Computer Vision.

[9]  Weisi Lin,et al.  Just-noticeable difference estimation with pixels in images , 2008, J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent..

[10]  Kaoru Arakawa Nonlinear digital filters for beautifying facial images in multimedia systems , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37512).

[11]  Matti Pietikäinen,et al.  A comparative study of texture measures with classification based on featured distributions , 1996, Pattern Recognit..

[12]  Yuukou Horita,et al.  No reference image quality assessment for JPEG2000 based on spatial features , 2008, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[13]  Eduard Montseny,et al.  Fuzzy Texture Unit and Fuzzy Texture Spectrum for texture characterization , 2007, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[14]  A. Bovik,et al.  A universal image quality index , 2002, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[15]  K. Arakawa,et al.  A system for beautifying face images using interactive evolutionary computing , 2005, 2005 International Symposium on Intelligent Signal Processing and Communication Systems.

[16]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.