Shadow detection: A survey and comparative evaluation of recent methods

Sanin, Andres, Sanderson, Conrad and Lovell, Brian C. (2012) Shadow detection: A survey and comparative evaluation of recent methods. Pattern Recognition, 45 4: 1684-1695. doi:10.1016/j.patcog.2011.10.001


Author Sanin, Andres
Sanderson, Conrad
Lovell, Brian C.
Title Shadow detection: A survey and comparative evaluation of recent methods
Journal name Pattern Recognition   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0031-3203
1873-5142
Publication date 2012-04
Year available 2011
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1016/j.patcog.2011.10.001
Volume 45
Issue 4
Start page 1684
End page 1695
Total pages 12
Place of publication Kidlington, Oxford, United Kingdom
Publisher Pergamon
Collection year 2013
Language eng
Formatted abstract
This paper presents a survey and a comparative evaluation of recent techniques for moving cast shadow detection. We identify shadow removal as a critical step for improving object detection and tracking. The survey covers methods published during the last decade, and places them in a feature-based taxonomy comprised of four categories: chromacity, physical, geometry and textures. A selection of prominent methods across the categories is compared in terms of quantitative performance measures (shadow detection and discrimination rates, colour desaturation) as well as qualitative observations. Furthermore, we propose the use of tracking performance as an unbiased approach for determining the practical usefulness of shadow detection methods.

The evaluation indicates that all shadow detection approaches make different contributions and all have individual strength and weaknesses. Out of the selected methods, the geometry-based technique has strict assumptions and is not generalisable to various environments, but it is a straightforward choice when the objects of interest are easy to model and their shadows have different orientation. The chromacity based method is the fastest to implement and run, but it is sensitive to noise and less effective in low saturated scenes. The physical method improves upon the accuracy of the chromacity method by adapting to local shadow models, but fails when the spectral properties of the objects are similar to that of the background. The small-region texture based method is especially robust for pixels whose neighbourhood is textured, but may take longer to implement and is the most computationally expensive. The large-region texture based method produces the most accurate results, but has a significant computational load due to its multiple processing steps.
Keyword Moving cast shadow detection
Literature review
Comparative evaluation
Tracking improvement
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ
Additional Notes Available online 8 October 2011

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Official 2013 Collection
School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 75 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 117 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 20 Mar 2012, 12:15:15 EST by System User on behalf of School of Information Technol and Elec Engineering