Abstract
A method for upgrading a projective reconstruction to metric is presented. The method compares favourably to state of the art algorithms and has been found extremely reliable for both large and small reconstructions in a large number of experiments on real data. The notion of a twisted pair is generalized to the uncalibrated case. The reconstruction is first transformed by considering cheirality so that it does not contain any twisted pairs. It is argued that this is essential, since the method then proceeds by local perturbation. As is preferrable, we utilize a cost function that reflects the prior likelihood of calibration matrices well. It is shown that with any such cost function, there is little hope of untwisting a twisted pair by local perturbation. The results show that in practice it is most often sufficient to start with a reconstruction that is free from twisted pairs, provided that the minimized objective function is a geometrically meaningful quantity. When subjected to the common degeneracy of little or no rotation between the views, the proposed method still yields a very reasonable member of the family of possible solutions. Furthermore, the method is very fast and therefore suitable for the purpose of viewing reconstructions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beardsley, P., Zisserman, A., and Murray,D. 1997. Sequential updating of projective and affine structure from motion. International Journal of Computer Vision, 23(3):235–259.
Bougnoux, S. 1998. From projective to euclidean space under any practical situation, a criticism of self-calibration. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 790–798.
Faugeras, O. 1993. Three-dimensional computer vision: Ageometric viewpoint. MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-06158-9.
Hartley, R. 1994. Euclidean reconstruction from uncalibrated views. Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 825:237–256.
Hartley, R. 1998. Cheirality. International Journal of Computer Vision, 26(1):41–61.
Hartley, R., Hayman, E., de Agapito, L., and Reid, I. 1999. Camera calibration and the search for infinity. In Proc. 7th International Conference on Computer Vision, vol. 1, pp. 510–517.
Hartley, R. and Zisserman, A. 2000. Multiple view geometry in computer vision. Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-62304-9.
Heyden, A. and Åström, K. 1999. Flexible calibration: Minimal cases for auto-calibration. In Proc. 7th International Conference on Computer Vision, vol. 1, pp. 350–355.
Laveau, S. and Faugeras, O. 1996. Oriented projective geometry for computer vision. Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1064:147–156.
Longuet-Higgins, H. 1981. A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two projections. Nature, 293:133–135.
Maybank, S. and Faugeras, O. 1992. A theory of self-calibration of a moving camera. International Journal of Computer Vision, 8(2):123–151.
Nistér, D. 2000. Reconstruction from uncalibrated sequences with a hierarchy of trifocal tensors. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1842, pp. 649–663.
Nistér, D. 2001. Automatic dense reconstruction from uncalibrated video sequences, PhD Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology KTH, ISBN 91-7283-053-0.
Nistér, D. 2001. Calibration with robust use of cheirality by quasiaffine reconstruction of the set of camera projection centres. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Vision, vol. 2, pp. 116–123.
Nistér, D. 2001. Frame decimation for structure and motion. SMILE 2000, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2018:17–34.
Nistér, D. 2003. An efficient solution to the five-point relative pose problem. In Proc. IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR 2003), vol. 2, pp. 195–202.
Pollefeys, M. 1999. Self-calibration and metric 3D reconstruction from uncalibrated image sequences. ISBN 90-5682-193-8, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Pollefeys, M., Koch, R. and Van Gool, L. 1999. Self-calibration and metric reconstruction in spite of varying and unknown internal camera parameters. International Journal of Computer Vision, 32(1):7–25.
Press, W., Teukolsky, S., Vetterling, W., and Flannery, B. 1988. Numerical recipes in C. Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-43108-5.
Robert, L. and Faugeras, O. 1993. Relative 3D positioning and 3D convex hull computation from a weakly calibrated stereo pair. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 540–544.
Semple, J. and Kneebone, G. 1952. Algebraic projective geometry. ISBN 0-19-8503636, Oxford University Press.
Stolfi, J. 1991. Oriented Projective Geometry: A Framework for Geometric Computations. Academic Press.
Sturm, P. 1999. Critical motion sequences for the self-calibration of cameras and stereo systems with variable focal length. In Proc. British Machine Vision Conference, pp. 63–72.
Triggs, B. 1997. Autocalibration and the absolute quadric. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 609–614.
Triggs, B. Mclauchlan, P., Hartley, R., and Fitzgibbon, A. 2000. Bundle adjustment-A modern synthesis. Springer Lecture Notes on Computer Science, Springer Verlag, 1883:298–375.
Werner, T., Pajdla, T., and Hlavác, V. 1998. Oriented projective reconstruction. In Proc. 22nd Workshop of the Austrian Association for Pattern Recognition, Wienna, Austria, pp. 245–254.
Zisserman, A., Liebowitz, D., and Armstrong, M. 1998. Resolving ambiguities in auto-calibration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 356(1740):1193–1211.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nistér, D. Untwisting a Projective Reconstruction. International Journal of Computer Vision 60, 165–183 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VISI.0000029667.76852.a1
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VISI.0000029667.76852.a1