Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
010
011
012
013
014
015
016
017
018
019
020
021
022
023
024
025
026
027
028
029
030
031
032
033
034
035
036
037
038
039
040
041
042
043
044
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
010
011
012
013
014
015
016
017
018
019
020
021
022
023
024
025
026
027
028
029
030
031
032
033
034
035
036
037
038
039
040
041
042
043
044
ECCV
#366ECCV
#366
Total Moving Face ReconstructionSupplement Materials
Anonymous ECCV submission
Paper ID 366
We compare to single view method in Figure 1. Our method (outlined in red)obtains higher quality coarse as well as detail reconstruction due to estimationof 3D flow coupled with extreme non frontal pose and shading. State of theart single view methods do not account for 3D flow. Additionally, while weestimate an initial template (average shape) of the individual we would like toreconstruct, state of the art single view methods use models of other individualsas the template; this also decreases the quality of the results.
Input& Ours&Single/view&[30]&Average&Shapes&
Fig. 1. A comparison to single view method by Kemelmacher et al. [30].