skip to main content
research-article

Exposing photo manipulation with inconsistent shadows

Published:04 July 2013Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We describe a geometric technique to detect physically inconsistent arrangements of shadows in an image. This technique combines multiple constraints from cast and attached shadows to constrain the projected location of a point light source. The consistency of the shadows is posed as a linear programming problem. A feasible solution indicates that the collection of shadows is physically plausible, while a failure to find a solution provides evidence of photo tampering.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

tp128.mp4

References

  1. Farid, H. 2009. A survey of image forgery detection. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 2, 26, 16--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Farid, H. and Bravo, M. J. 2010. Image forensic analyses that elude the human visual system. In Proceedings of the SPIE Conference on Media Forensics and Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jacobson, J. and Werner, S. 2004. Why cast shadows are expendable: Insensitivity of human observers and the inherent ambiguity of cast shadows in pictorial art. Percept. 33, 11, 1369--1383.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Johnson, M. K. and Farid, H. 2005. Exposing digital forgeries by detecting inconsistencies in lighting. In Proceedings of the 7th Multimedia and Security Workshop. 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Johnson, M. K. and Farid, H. 2007. Exposing digital forgeries in complex lighting environments. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Security 3, 2, 450--461. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Karsch, K., Hedau, V., Forsyth, D., and Hoiem, D. 2011. Rendering synthetic objects into legacy photographs. In Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia Conference. 157:1--157:12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Kee, E. and Farid, H. 2010. Exposing digital forgeries from 3-D lighting environments. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Information Forensics and Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Khang, B.-G., Koenderink, J. J., and Kappers, A. 2006. Perception of illumination direction in images of 3-D convex objects: Influence of surface materials and light fields. Percept. 35, 5, 625--645.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Koenderink, J. J., Pont, S., Van Doorn, A., Kappers, A., and Todd, J. 2007. The visual light field. Percept. 36, 11, 1595--1610.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Koenderink, J. J., Van Doorn, A., and Pont, S. 2004. Light direction from shad(ow)ed random Gaussian surfaces. Percept. 33, 12, 1405--1420.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Lalonde, J.-F., Efros, A. A., and Narasimhan, S. G. 2011. Estimating the natural illumination conditions from a single outdoor image. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu, Q., Cao, X., Deng, C., and Guo, X. 2011. Identifying image composites through shadow matte consistency. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 6, 3, 1111--1122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mamassian, P. 2004. Impossible shadows and the shadow correspondence problem. Percept. 33, 11, 1279--1290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Nillius, P. and Eklundh, J.-O. 2001. Automatic estimation of the projected light source direction. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Okabe, T., Sato, I., and Sato, Y. 2004. Spherical harmonics vs. haar wavelets: Basis for recovering illumination from cast shadows. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 1. 50--57.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. O'Shea, J. P., Agrawala, M., and Banks, M. S. 2010. The influence of shape cues on the perception of lighting directions. J. Vis. 12, 10, 21:1--21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ostrovsky, Y., Cavanagh, P., and Sinha, P. 2005. Perceiving illumination inconsistencies in scenes. Percept. 34, 1301--1314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Pont, S. and Koenderink, J. 2007. Matching illumination of solid objects. Attent. Percept. Psychophys. 69, 459--468.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Ramamoorthi, R. and Hanrahan, P. 2001. An efficient representation for irradiance environment maps. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH'01). ACM Press, New York, 497--500. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Sato, I., Sato, Y., and Ikeuchi, K. 2003. Illumination from shadows. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 25, 3, 290--300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Shesh, A., Criminisi, A., Rother, C., and Smyth, G. 2009. 3Daware image editing for out of bounds photography. In Proceedings of the Graphics Interface Conference. 47--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Stork, D. G. and Johnson, M. K. 2006. Estimating the location of illuminants in realist master paintings: Computer image analysis addresses a debate in art history of the baroque. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition. 255--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Zhang, W., Cao, X., Zhang, J., Zhu, J., and Wang, P. 2009. Detecting photographic composites using shadows. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo. 1042--1045. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Exposing photo manipulation with inconsistent shadows

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Graphics
          ACM Transactions on Graphics  Volume 32, Issue 3
          June 2013
          129 pages
          ISSN:0730-0301
          EISSN:1557-7368
          DOI:10.1145/2487228
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 4 July 2013
          • Accepted: 1 February 2013
          • Revised: 1 December 2012
          • Received: 1 February 2012
          Published in tog Volume 32, Issue 3

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader