Some Results on Minimal Euclidean Reconstruction from Four Points
- 124 Downloads
Methods for reconstruction and camera estimation from miminal data are often used to boot-strap robust (RANSAC and LMS) and optimal (bundle adjustment) structure and motion estimates. Minimal methods are known for projective reconstruction from two or more uncalibrated images, and for “5 point” relative orientation and Euclidean reconstruction from two calibrated parameters, but we know of no efficient minimal method for three or more calibrated cameras except the uniqueness proof by Holt and Netravali. We reformulate the problem of Euclidean reconstruction from minimal data of four points in three or more calibrated images, and develop a random rational simulation method to show some new results on this problem. In addition to an alternative proof of the uniqueness of the solutions in general cases, we further show that unknown coplanar configurations are not singular, but the true solution is a double root. The solution from a known coplanar configuration is also generally unique. Some especially symmetric point-camera configurations lead to multiple solutions, but only symmetry of points or the cameras gives a unique solution.
Keywords3D reconstruction relative orientation structure from motion polynomial methods algebraic geometry
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.D. Cox, J. Little, and D. O’Shea, Ideals, Varieties, and Algorithms, Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
- 4.D. Cox, J. Little, and D.O’Shea. Using Algebraic Geometry, Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
- 5.M. Demazure, “Sur deux problèmes de reconstruction,” Technical report, INRIA, 1988.Google Scholar
- 6.I.Z. Emeris, “A general solver based on sparse resultants: Numerical issues and kinematic applications,” Technical Report RR-3110, INRIA, 1997.Google Scholar
- 7.I.Z. Emeris, “A general solver based on sparse resultants: Numerical issues and kinematic applications,” Technical Report RR-3110 (http://www.inria.fr/RRRT/RR-3110.html), INRIA, Sophia Antipolis, France, Jan. 1997.
- 8.O. Faugeras, “What can be seen in three dimensions with an uncalibrated stereo rig?” in Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Computer Vision, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, G. Sandini (Ed.), Springer-Verlag, May 1992, pp. 563–578.Google Scholar
- 11.S.I. Granshaw, “Bundle adjustment methods in engineering photogrammetry,” Photogrammetric Record, Vol. 56, No. 10, pp. 181–207, 1980.Google Scholar
- 12.R.I. Hartley, R. Gupta, and T. Chang, “Stereo from uncalibrated cameras,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA, 1992, pp. 761–764.Google Scholar
- 21.H.C. Longuet-Higgins, “A method of obtaining the relative positions of 4 points from 3 perspective projections,” in Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference, Glasgow, Scotland, pp. 86–94, 1991.Google Scholar
- 23.A.N. Netravali, T.S. Huang, A.S. Krishnakumar, and R.J. Holt, “Algebraic methods in 3D motion estimation from two-view point correspondences,” Int. J. Imaging Systems & Technology, Vol. 1, pp. 78–99, 1989.Google Scholar
- 24.D. Nister, “An efficient solution to the five-point relative pose problem,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Madison, USA, June 2003, pp. II–195–202.Google Scholar
- 29.C.C. Slama (ed), Manual of Photogrammetry, 4th edition. American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Falls Church, Virginia, USA, 1980.Google Scholar
- 30.M. Spetsakis and J. Aloimonos, “A unified theory of structure from motion,” in Proceedings of DARPA Image Understanding Workshop, 1990, pp. 271–283.Google Scholar
- 32.P.H.S. Torr and A. Zisserman, “Robust parameterization and computation of the trifocal tensor,” in R.B. Fisher and E. Trucco (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh British Machine Vision Conference, Vol. 2, Edinburgh, Scotland, British Machine Vision Association, September 1996, pp. 655–664.Google Scholar
- 33.B. Triggs, “Routines for relative pose of two calibrated cameras from 5 points,” Technical report, INRIA, 2000.Google Scholar
- 34.S. Ullman, “The Interpretation of Visual Motion,” The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1979.Google Scholar
- 35.Z. Zhang, R. Deriche, O. Faugeras, and Q.T. Luong, “A robust technique for matching two uncalibrated images through the recovery of the unknown epipolar geometry,” Rapport de recherche 2273, INRIA, May 1994.Google Scholar