Single-view-based 3D facial reconstruction method robust against pose variations. Issue 1 (January 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jo, Jaeik; Choi, Heeseung; Kim, Ig-Jae; Kim, Jaihie
• Is Part Of: Pattern recognition. Volume 48:Issue 1(2015:Jan.)
• Page Start: 73
• Page End: 85
• Publication Date: 2015-01
• Subjects: Pattern perception -- Periodicals; Perception des structures -- Périodiques; Patroonherkenning; 006.4
• DOI: 10.1016/j.patcog.2014.07.013
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0031-3203

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="author" id="ab0005"> <title id="sect0005">Abstract</title> <sec> <p id="sp0105">The 3D Morphable Model (3DMM) and the Structure from Motion (SfM) methods are widely used for 3D facial reconstruction from 2D single-view or multiple-view images. However, model-based methods suffer from disadvantages such as high computational costs and vulnerability to local minima and head pose variations. The SfM-based methods require multiple facial images in various poses. To overcome these disadvantages, we propose a single-view-based 3D facial reconstruction method that is person-specific and robust to pose variations. Our proposed method combines the simplified 3DMM and the SfM methods. First, 2D initial frontal Facial Feature Points (FFPs) are estimated from a preliminary 3D facial image that is reconstructed by the simplified 3DMM. Second, a bilateral symmetric facial image and its corresponding FFPs are obtained from the original side-view image and corresponding FFPs by using the mirroring technique. Finally, a more accurate the 3D facial shape is reconstructed by the SfM using the frontal, original, and bilateral symmetric FFPs. We evaluated the proposed method using facial images in 35 different poses. The reconstructed facial images and the ground-truth 3D facial shapes obtained from the scanner were compared. The proposed method proved more robust to pose variations than 3DMM. The average 3D Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) between the reconstructed and ground-truth 3D faces was less than 2.6 mm when 2D FFPs were manually annotated, and less than 3.5 mm when automatically annotated.</p> </sec> </abstract>