2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/cvpr.2016.372
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated 3D Face Reconstruction from Multiple Images Using Quality Measures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
62
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
62
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our confidence prediction subnet is also trained in a weakly-supervised fashion without ground-truth label. We show that our method clearly outperforms naive aggregation (e.g., shape averaging) and some heuristic strategies [34]. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt towards CNN-based 3D face reconstruction and aggregation from an unconstrained image set.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 79%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Our confidence prediction subnet is also trained in a weakly-supervised fashion without ground-truth label. We show that our method clearly outperforms naive aggregation (e.g., shape averaging) and some heuristic strategies [34]. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt towards CNN-based 3D face reconstruction and aggregation from an unconstrained image set.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…The whole pipeline is complex and may break down under severe occlusion and extreme pose. Our goal in this paper is not to replace these traditional methods, but to study the shape aggregation problem (similar to [34]) with a CNN and provide an extremely fast and robust alternative learned end-to-end.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The second one is to average the three predicted 3D models in a triplet and then compute the point-to-plane errors between the pooled 3D model with ground-truth model (shown in Table 2 as "+pool" entries). The third one is to compute the weighted average of three predicted 3D models as [22] Genova18 MoFA Tran17 Ours Inputs and then compute the point-to-plane errors (shown in Table 2 as "+ [22]" entries). Table 2 shows the mean errors of the comparison.…”
Section: Comparisons To State-of-the-art Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They used RNNs to fuse identity-related features from CNNs to produce more discriminative reconstructions, but multi-view geometric constraints are not exploited in their approach. Notice that there are some other 3DMM-based methods in multi-image settings [22], but in these work each input image is dealt individually, which is not the same as our multi-view setting.…”
Section: Multi-view 3dmm-based Reconstructionmentioning
confidence: 99%