Multi-view geometry for general camera models

We consider the structure from motion problem for a previously introduced, highly general imaging model, where cameras are modeled as possibly unconstrained sets of projection rays. This allows to describe most existing camera types (at least for those operating in the visible domain), including pinhole cameras, sensors with radial or more general distortions, catadioptric cameras (central or non-central), etc. We introduce a hierarchy of general camera models: the most general model has unconstrained projection rays whereas the most constrained model dealt with here is the central model, where all rays pass through a single point. Intermediate models are what we call axial cameras (all rays touch a single line), and x-slit cameras (rays touch two lines). The foundations for a multi-view geometry of completely non-central cameras are given, leading to the formulation of multi-view matching tensors, analogous to the fundamental/essential matrices, trifocal and quadrifocal tensors of perspective cameras. This framework is then specialized explicitly for the two-view case, for the intermediate camera types mentioned above.Nous considérons le problème de l’estimation de la structure et du mouvement pour un modèle de caméras hautement général, qui représente une caméra par un ensemble de rayons de projection. Ceci permet de décrire la plupart des types de caméras existants (du moins celles qui opèrent dans le domaine visible), y inclus les caméras sténopé, les caméras avec des distorsions radiales ou plus générales, les caméras catadioptriques (à point de vue unique ou non), etc. Nous introduisons une hiérarchie de modèles de caméras généraux : le modèle le plus général peut posséder des rayons de projection quelconques tandis que le modèle le plus contraint que nous considérons ici est le modèle à point de vue unique (tous les rayons passent par un même point). Parmi les modèles intermédiaires, nous identifions ce que nous appelons les caméras axiales (tous les rayons touchent une même ligne) et les caméras connues sous le nom de « cross-slit » (les rayons touchent deux lignes). Les fondements d’une géométrie d’images multiples pour le modèle de caméras le plus général sont donnés. Ils se manifestent par la formulation de tenseurs d’appariement multi-vues, qui sont l’analogue des matrices fondamentales/essentielles, tenseurs trifocaux ou quadrifocaux des caméras perspectives. Ce cadre théorique général est ensuite spécialisé pour les modèles de caméras intermédiaires mentionnés, pour le cas de deux images

General models for rational cameras and the case of two-slit projections

International audienceThe rational camera model recently introduced in [19] provides a general methodology for studying abstract nonlinear imaging systems and their multi-view geometry. This paper builds on this framework to study "physical realizations" of rational cameras. More precisely, we give an explicit account of the mapping between between physical visual rays and image points (missing in the original description), which allows us to give simple analytical expressions for direct and inverse projections. We also consider "primitive" camera models, that are orbits under the action of various projective transformations, and lead to a general notion of intrinsic parameters. The methodology is general, but it is illustrated concretely by an in-depth study of two-slit cameras, that we model using pairs of linear projections. This simple analytical form allows us to describe models for the corresponding primitive cameras, to introduce intrinsic parameters with a clear geometric meaning, and to define an epipolar tensor characterizing two-view correspondences. In turn, this leads to new algorithms for structure from motion and self-calibration

Structureless Camera Motion Estimation of Unordered Omnidirectional Images

This work aims at providing a novel camera motion estimation pipeline from large collections of unordered omnidirectional images. In oder to keep the pipeline as general and flexible as possible, cameras are modelled as unit spheres, allowing to incorporate any central camera type. For each camera an unprojection lookup is generated from intrinsics, which is called P2S-map (Pixel-to-Sphere-map), mapping pixels to their corresponding positions on the unit sphere. Consequently the camera geometry becomes independent of the underlying projection model. The pipeline also generates P2S-maps from world map projections with less distortion effects as they are known from cartography. Using P2S-maps from camera calibration and world map projection allows to convert omnidirectional camera images to an appropriate world map projection in oder to apply standard feature extraction and matching algorithms for data association. The proposed estimation pipeline combines the flexibility of SfM (Structure from Motion) - which handles unordered image collections - with the efficiency of PGO (Pose Graph Optimization), which is used as back-end in graph-based Visual SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) approaches to optimize camera poses from large image sequences. SfM uses BA (Bundle Adjustment) to jointly optimize camera poses (motion) and 3d feature locations (structure), which becomes computationally expensive for large-scale scenarios. On the contrary PGO solves for camera poses (motion) from measured transformations between cameras, maintaining optimization managable. The proposed estimation algorithm combines both worlds. It obtains up-to-scale transformations between image pairs using two-view constraints, which are jointly scaled using trifocal constraints. A pose graph is generated from scaled two-view transformations and solved by PGO to obtain camera motion efficiently even for large image collections. Obtained results can be used as input data to provide initial pose estimates for further 3d reconstruction purposes e.g. to build a sparse structure from feature correspondences in an SfM or SLAM framework with further refinement via BA. The pipeline also incorporates fixed extrinsic constraints from multi-camera setups as well as depth information provided by RGBD sensors. The entire camera motion estimation pipeline does not need to generate a sparse 3d structure of the captured environment and thus is called SCME (Structureless Camera Motion Estimation).:1 Introduction 1.1 Motivation 1.1.1 Increasing Interest of Image-Based 3D Reconstruction 1.1.2 Underground Environments as Challenging Scenario 1.1.3 Improved Mobile Camera Systems for Full Omnidirectional Imaging 1.2 Issues 1.2.1 Directional versus Omnidirectional Image Acquisition 1.2.2 Structure from Motion versus Visual Simultaneous Localization and Mapping 1.3 Contribution 1.4 Structure of this Work 2 Related Work 2.1 Visual Simultaneous Localization and Mapping 2.1.1 Visual Odometry 2.1.2 Pose Graph Optimization 2.2 Structure from Motion 2.2.1 Bundle Adjustment 2.2.2 Structureless Bundle Adjustment 2.3 Corresponding Issues 2.4 Proposed Reconstruction Pipeline 3 Cameras and Pixel-to-Sphere Mappings with P2S-Maps 3.1 Types 3.2 Models 3.2.1 Unified Camera Model 3.2.2 Polynomal Camera Model 3.2.3 Spherical Camera Model 3.3 P2S-Maps - Mapping onto Unit Sphere via Lookup Table 3.3.1 Lookup Table as Color Image 3.3.2 Lookup Interpolation 3.3.3 Depth Data Conversion 4 Calibration 4.1 Overview of Proposed Calibration Pipeline 4.2 Target Detection 4.3 Intrinsic Calibration 4.3.1 Selected Examples 4.4 Extrinsic Calibration 4.4.1 3D-2D Pose Estimation 4.4.2 2D-2D Pose Estimation 4.4.3 Pose Optimization 4.4.4 Uncertainty Estimation 4.4.5 PoseGraph Representation 4.4.6 Bundle Adjustment 4.4.7 Selected Examples 5 Full Omnidirectional Image Projections 5.1 Panoramic Image Stitching 5.2 World Map Projections 5.3 World Map Projection Generator for P2S-Maps 5.4 Conversion between Projections based on P2S-Maps 5.4.1 Proposed Workflow 5.4.2 Data Storage Format 5.4.3 Real World Example 6 Relations between Two Camera Spheres 6.1 Forward and Backward Projection 6.2 Triangulation 6.2.1 Linear Least Squares Method 6.2.2 Alternative Midpoint Method 6.3 Epipolar Geometry 6.4 Transformation Recovery from Essential Matrix 6.4.1 Cheirality 6.4.2 Standard Procedure 6.4.3 Simplified Procedure 6.4.4 Improved Procedure 6.5 Two-View Estimation 6.5.1 Evaluation Strategy 6.5.2 Error Metric 6.5.3 Evaluation of Estimation Algorithms 6.5.4 Concluding Remarks 6.6 Two-View Optimization 6.6.1 Epipolar-Based Error Distances 6.6.2 Projection-Based Error Distances 6.6.3 Comparison between Error Distances 6.7 Two-View Translation Scaling 6.7.1 Linear Least Squares Estimation 6.7.2 Non-Linear Least Squares Optimization 6.7.3 Comparison between Initial and Optimized Scaling Factor 6.8 Homography to Identify Degeneracies 6.8.1 Homography for Spherical Cameras 6.8.2 Homography Estimation 6.8.3 Homography Optimization 6.8.4 Homography and Pure Rotation 6.8.5 Homography in Epipolar Geometry 7 Relations between Three Camera Spheres 7.1 Three View Geometry 7.2 Crossing Epipolar Planes Geometry 7.3 Trifocal Geometry 7.4 Relation between Trifocal, Three-View and Crossing Epipolar Planes 7.5 Translation Ratio between Up-To-Scale Two-View Transformations 7.5.1 Structureless Determination Approaches 7.5.2 Structure-Based Determination Approaches 7.5.3 Comparison between Proposed Approaches 8 Pose Graphs 8.1 Optimization Principle 8.2 Solvers 8.2.1 Additional Graph Solvers 8.2.2 False Loop Closure Detection 8.3 Pose Graph Generation 8.3.1 Generation of Synthetic Pose Graph Data 8.3.2 Optimization of Synthetic Pose Graph Data 9 Structureless Camera Motion Estimation 9.1 SCME Pipeline 9.2 Determination of Two-View Translation Scale Factors 9.3 Integration of Depth Data 9.4 Integration of Extrinsic Camera Constraints 10 Camera Motion Estimation Results 10.1 Directional Camera Images 10.2 Omnidirectional Camera Images 11 Conclusion 11.1 Summary 11.2 Outlook and Future Work Appendices A.1 Additional Extrinsic Calibration Results A.2 Linear Least Squares Scaling A.3 Proof Rank Deficiency A.4 Alternative Derivation Midpoint Method A.5 Simplification of Depth Calculation A.6 Relation between Epipolar and Circumferential Constraint A.7 Covariance Estimation A.8 Uncertainty Estimation from Epipolar Geometry A.9 Two-View Scaling Factor Estimation: Uncertainty Estimation A.10 Two-View Scaling Factor Optimization: Uncertainty Estimation A.11 Depth from Adjoining Two-View Geometries A.12 Alternative Three-View Derivation A.12.1 Second Derivation Approach A.12.2 Third Derivation Approach A.13 Relation between Trifocal Geometry and Alternative Midpoint Method A.14 Additional Pose Graph Generation Examples A.15 Pose Graph Solver Settings A.16 Additional Pose Graph Optimization Examples Bibliograph

Planetary Image Geometry Library

The Planetary Image Geometry (PIG) library is a multi-mission library used for projecting images (EDRs, or Experiment Data Records) and managing their geometry for in-situ missions. A collection of models describes cameras and their articulation, allowing application programs such as mosaickers, terrain generators, and pointing correction tools to be written in a multi-mission manner, without any knowledge of parameters specific to the supported missions. Camera model objects allow transformation of image coordinates to and from view vectors in XYZ space. Pointing models, specific to each mission, describe how to orient the camera models based on telemetry or other information. Surface models describe the surface in general terms. Coordinate system objects manage the various coordinate systems involved in most missions. File objects manage access to metadata (labels, including telemetry information) in the input EDRs and RDRs (Reduced Data Records). Label models manage metadata information in output files. Site objects keep track of different locations where the spacecraft might be at a given time. Radiometry models allow correction of radiometry for an image. Mission objects contain basic mission parameters. Pointing adjustment ("nav") files allow pointing to be corrected. The object-oriented structure (C++) makes it easy to subclass just the pieces of the library that are truly mission-specific. Typically, this involves just the pointing model and coordinate systems, and parts of the file model. Once the library was developed (initially for Mars Polar Lander, MPL), adding new missions ranged from two days to a few months, resulting in significant cost savings as compared to rewriting all the application programs for each mission. Currently supported missions include Mars Pathfinder (MPF), MPL, Mars Exploration Rover (MER), Phoenix, and Mars Science Lab (MSL). Applications based on this library create the majority of operational image RDRs for those missions. A Java wrapper around the library allows parts of it to be used from Java code (via a native JNI interface). Future conversions of all or part of the library to Java are contemplated

Virtual Rephotography: Novel View Prediction Error for 3D Reconstruction

The ultimate goal of many image-based modeling systems is to render photo-realistic novel views of a scene without visible artifacts. Existing evaluation metrics and benchmarks focus mainly on the geometric accuracy of the reconstructed model, which is, however, a poor predictor of visual accuracy. Furthermore, using only geometric accuracy by itself does not allow evaluating systems that either lack a geometric scene representation or utilize coarse proxy geometry. Examples include light field or image-based rendering systems. We propose a unified evaluation approach based on novel view prediction error that is able to analyze the visual quality of any method that can render novel views from input images. One of the key advantages of this approach is that it does not require ground truth geometry. This dramatically simplifies the creation of test datasets and benchmarks. It also allows us to evaluate the quality of an unknown scene during the acquisition and reconstruction process, which is useful for acquisition planning. We evaluate our approach on a range of methods including standard geometry-plus-texture pipelines as well as image-based rendering techniques, compare it to existing geometry-based benchmarks, and demonstrate its utility for a range of use cases.Comment: 10 pages, 12 figures, paper was submitted to ACM Transactions on Graphics for revie

Hyperparameter-free losses for model-based monocular reconstruction

This work proposes novel hyperparameter-free losses for single view 3D reconstruction with morphable models (3DMM). We dispense with the hyperparameters used in other works by exploiting geometry, so that the shape of the object and the camera pose are jointly optimized in a sole term expression. This simplification reduces the optimization time and its complexity. Moreover, we propose a novel implicit regularization technique based on random virtual projections that does not require additional 2D or 3D annotations. Our experiments suggest that minimizing a shape reprojection error together with the proposed implicit regularization is especially suitable for applications that require precise alignment between geometry and image spaces, such as augmented reality. We evaluate our losses on a large scale dataset with 3D ground truth and publish our implementations to facilitate reproducibility and public benchmarking in this field.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft