TL;DR
This paper investigates the limitations of using 2D geometric cues for 3D face shape reconstruction, revealing inherent ambiguities due to face shape flexibility and perspective effects, even with advanced algorithms and CNN methods.
Contribution
The paper demonstrates that 2D geometric information alone cannot uniquely determine 3D face shape due to inherent ambiguities, and introduces algorithms to analyze these ambiguities.
Findings
Geometric cues are ambiguous for 3D face reconstruction.
Perspective projection introduces additional ambiguity.
State-of-the-art CNN methods also face these ambiguities.
Abstract
A face image contains geometric cues in the form of configurational information and contours that can be used to estimate 3D face shape. While it is clear that 3D reconstruction from 2D points is highly ambiguous if no further constraints are enforced, one might expect that the face-space constraint solves this problem. We show that this is not the case and that geometric information is an ambiguous cue. There are two sources for this ambiguity. The first is that, within the space of 3D face shapes, there are flexibility modes that remain when some parts of the face are fixed. The second occurs only under perspective projection and is a result of perspective transformation as camera distance varies. Two different faces, when viewed at different distances, can give rise to the same 2D geometry. To demonstrate these ambiguities, we develop new algorithms for fitting a 3D morphable model…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
