4.3 Article

Style-based classification of Chinese ink and wash paintings

Journal

OPTICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 52, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

SPIE-SOC PHOTO-OPTICAL INSTRUMENTATION ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.52.9.093101

Keywords

artist recognition; ink and wash paintings analysis; style-based art classification

Categories

Funding

  1. Tianjin University
  2. National Natural Science Foundation in China [61003201]
  3. Tianjin University of Finance and Economics Science Foundation [Q1104]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Following the fact that a large collection of ink and wash paintings (IWP) is being digitized and made available on the Internet, their automated content description, analysis, and management are attracting attention across research communities. While existing research in relevant areas is primarily focused on image processing approaches, a style-based algorithm is proposed to classify IWPs automatically by their authors. As IWPs do not have colors or even tones, the proposed algorithm applies edge detection to locate the local region and detect painting strokes to enable histogram-based feature extraction and capture of important cues to reflect the styles of different artists. Such features are then applied to drive a number of neural networks in parallel to complete the classification, and an information entropy balanced fusion is proposed to make an integrated decision for the multiple neural network classification results in which the entropy is used as a pointer to combine the global and local features. Evaluations via experiments support that the proposed algorithm achieves good performances, providing excellent potential for computerized analysis and management of IWPs. (C) The Authors. Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available