Advertisement

Dualizing Scene Reconstruction Algorithms

  • Richard Hartley
  • Gilles Debunne
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1506)

Abstract

It has been known since the work of Carlsson [2] and Weinshall [17] that there is a dualization principle that allows one to interchange the role of points being viewed by several cameras and the camera centres themselves. In principle this implies the possibility of dualizing projective reconstruction algorithms to obtain new algorithms. In this paper, this theme is developed at a theoretical and algorithmic level. The nature of the duality mapping is explored and its application to reconstruction ambiguity is discussed. An explicit method for dualizing any projective reconstruction algorithm is given. At the practical implementation level, however, it is shown that there are difficulties which have so far defeated successful application of this dualization method to produce working algorithms.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    T. Buchanan. The twisted cubic and camera calibration. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 42:130–132, 1988.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Stefan Carlsson. Duality of reconstruction and positioning from projective views. In Workshop on Representations of Visual Scenes, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. I. Hartley. In defense of the eight-point algorithm. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19(6):580–593, October 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Richard I. Hartley. Lines and points in three views and the trifocal tensor. International Journal of Computer Vision, 22(2):125–140, March 1997.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Richard I. Hartley. Computation of the quadrifocal tensor. In Computer Vision-ECCV’ 98, Volume I, LNCS-Series Vol. 1406, Springer-Verlag, pages 20–35, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Anders Heyden. Reconstruction from image sequences by means of relative depth. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 1058–1063, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Anders Heyden and Kalle Åström. Euclidean reconstruction from image sequences with varying and unknown focal length and principal point. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 438–443, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S. J. Maybank. The projective geometry of ambiguous surfaces. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., A 332:1–47, 1990.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Marc Pollefeys, Reinhard Koch, and Luc Van Gool. Self-calibration and metric reconstruction in spite of varying and unknown internal camera parameters. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 90–95, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Long Quan. Invariants of 6 points from 3 uncalibrated images. In Computer Vision-ECCV’ 94, Volume II, LNCS-Series Vol. 801, Springer-Verlag, pages 459–470, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J.G. Semple and G. T. Kneebone. Algebraic Projective Geometry. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1952.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    S.J. Maybank and A. Shashua. Ambiguity in reconstruction from images of six points. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 703–708, 1998.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Peter Sturm and Bill Triggs. A factorization based algorithm for multi-image projective structure and motion. In Computer Vision-ECCV’ 96, Volume II, LNCS-Series Vol. 1065, Springer-Verlag, pages 709–720, 1996.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    P.H.S. Torr and D.W. Murray. A review of robust methods to estimate the fundamental matrix. IJCV-to appear.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B. Triggs. Factorization methods for projective structure and motion. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 845–851, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Bill Triggs. Autocalibration and the absolute quadric. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 609–614, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    D. Weinshall, M. Werman, and A. Shashua. Shape descriptors: Bilinear, trilinear and quadrilinear relations for multi-point geometry and linear projective reconstruction algorithms. In Workshop on Representations of Visual Scenes, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    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. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 78:87–119, October 1995.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Zhengyou Zhang. Determining the epipolar geometry and its uncertainty: A review. International Journal of Computer Vision, 27(2):161–195, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Hartley
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gilles Debunne
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.GE-CRDSchenectadyUSA
  2. 2.iMAGIS-GRAVIRGrenobleUSA

Personalised recommendations