The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Image and Video Matting: A Survey
Abstract
Matting refers to the problem of accurate foreground estimation in images and video. It is one of the key techniques in many image editing and film production applications, thus has been extensively studied in the literature. With the recent advances of digital cameras, using matting techniques to create novel composites or facilitate other editing tasks has gained increasing interest from both professionals as well as consumers. Consequently, various matting techniques and systems have been proposed to try to efficiently extract high quality mattes from both still images and video sequences. This survey provides a comprehensive review of existing image and video matting algorithms and systems, with an emphasis on the advanced techniques that have been recently proposed. The first part of the survey is focused on image matting. The fundamental techniques shared by many image matting algorithms, such as color sampling methods and matting affinities, are first analyzed. Image matting techniques are then classified into three categories based on their underlying methodologies, and an objective evaluation is conducted to reveal the advantages and disadvantages of each category. A unique Accuracy vs. Cost analysis is presented as a practical guidance for readers to properly choose matting tools that best fit their specific requirements and constraints. The second part of the survey is focused on video matting. The difficulties and challenges of video matting are first analyzed, and various ways of combining matting algorithms with other video processing techniques for building efficient video matting systems are reviewed. Key contributions, advantages as well as limitations of important systems are summarized. Finally, special matting systems that rely on capturing additional foreground/background information to automate the matting process are discussed. A few interesting directions for future matting research are presented in the conclusion.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Graph Cuts and Efficient N-D Image Segmentation
Boykov, Y., & Funka-Lea, G. (2006) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-006-7934-5 · Cited by 1,910
Cited by
Multi-Focus Image Fusion: Algorithms, Evaluation, and a Library
Zafar, R., Farid, M. S., & Khan, M. H. (2020) · Journal of Imaging · doi:10.3390/jimaging6070060 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, J., & Cohen, M. F.
- Venue
- Foundations and Trends® in Computer Graphics and Vision
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 97-175
- ISSN
- 1572-2740 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-2759
- OpenAlex
- W2157887643
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 40.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.