2012
DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.263-266.3021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Image Copy-Move Forgery Detection Based on SIFT and Gray Level

Abstract: In order to reduce the false matching rate when detecting copy-move forgeries, an improved method based on SIFT and gray level was proposed in this study. Firstly, extract SIFT key points, and establish SIFT feature vector for every key point; Secondly, extract the gray level feature and combine it with SIFT feature to found a feature vector with size of 129D; Finally, match the above feature vector between every two different key points and then the copy-move regions would be detected. The experimental result… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(6 reference statements)
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(b) represents the copy-move forgery image of (a). (c), (d), and (e) respectively represents the detection results of the algorithm in [9], [10] and this paper. The connected part of the figure is the detected copy-move source area and target area.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(b) represents the copy-move forgery image of (a). (c), (d), and (e) respectively represents the detection results of the algorithm in [9], [10] and this paper. The connected part of the figure is the detected copy-move source area and target area.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The three sets of images represent the detection results of copy-move, copy-scaling-move and copy-rotation & scaling-move forgery respectively. In order to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method, comparative experiments are conducted between the improved SURF algorithm and the algorithm in [9] and [10] in the same experimental environment. In Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Shen et al's method [27] is robust against Gaussian blurring and its false matching rate is lower than that of conventional methods. However, their method has a high time complexity because the SIFT and grey level features must be extracted together.…”
Section: Keypoint-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When compared with previous methods proposed by Fridrich et al [8] and Popescu et al [17], the computational time, true positive rate, and false positive rate of this SIFT-based method were all improved. In a related approach [27], the grey-level feature is combined with the SIFT features to form a new feature vector. This approach successfully reduced false matching rate, but at the expense of greater time complexity.…”
Section: Keypoint-based Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These features are computed only on the image itself, without any division, and the extracted features vectors per keypoint are compared with each other to find similar keypoints. Two well-known keypoint-based methods are: Scale Invariant Transform Methods (SIFT) [31,32] and Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) [33,34]. One of the state of art of keypoint based methods is (Amerini et al, 2011) [32] that proposed a novel method based on SIFT, which is able to examine region duplication forgery and image splicing.…”
Section: )mentioning
confidence: 99%