Mirror plane — where it appears
Named by 12 essays across 5 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
A mirror is a second camera
Reflect the scene and photograph it, or reflect the camera and photograph the scene. The two routes disagree by 315 px and agree to the last bit once one axis of the image is reversed — which is the whole of why a mirror is said to swap left and right, written down.
The near plane can be any plane
Rewrite one row of a projection matrix and the near plane stops being perpendicular to the axis and becomes whatever plane is asked for. Every x and every y is untouched — it is the same projection of the same scene from the same eye — and the depth order is wrecked, which is a clean separation of the two things a projection matrix does.
One shutter, two views
A photograph with a mirror in it is a stereo pair, and a peculiarly well-behaved one. Its fundamental matrix is skew-symmetric, so both epipoles are the same point; that point is where the camera would see its own lens; and every line joining a mark to its reflection passes through it, to 1.4 × 10⁻¹² px. The baseline is twice the distance to the glass, which is the one number a single view cannot supply and a tape measure can.
Square to the camera is the worst mirror
A mirror pair's baseline runs along the mirror's normal, so a mirror facing the camera puts the second eye directly behind the first — the forward-motion arrangement, with the epipole in the middle of the frame and the rays to a mark crossing at 23°. Turning it forty-four degrees opens that to 65° and cuts the worst depth error threefold, and the number to watch is not the angle but where the reflected lens sits on the print.
A mirror that is not parallel to the wall
Carry the depth in front of the glass an equal depth behind it, square to the wall. That is exact for a mirror hung parallel to the wall and 1.26 metres — 107 pixels — out for one turned 20°. Two invariants survive the turn instead, and one of the two nearly did not survive being tested, because it had been written in a form that could not fail.
Two mirrors make one turn
Reflect a point in two mirrors meeting at 36° and the images arrive nine at a time, every one of them on a single circle about the line where the mirrors meet, to 4 × 10⁻¹⁶ m. The rule taught for the count — three hundred and sixty over the angle, less one — is right at six of nine angles tried and wrong at the rest, because it is a rule about angles that divide a half turn and it is quoted for angles that divide a whole one.
Three constructions, one map
A shadow cast on a floor, an anamorph painted on one, and a reflection in a mirror are usually treated as three different subjects, each with its own derivation and its own figure. Decomposed into their fixed points and lines, three of them are the same kind of map — a central collineation with a line of fixed points — and the fourth, a rectification, is not. That difference separates changing where a picture is seen from, from changing one picture into another.
Two mirrors are three cameras
A photograph with two mirrors in it holds three views of the scene from three places, at baselines of 2.90, 3.10 and 2.26 metres. Two of the three pairwise geometries are mirror pairs and are skew; the third is a rotation by twice the angle between the mirrors, and it is not new evidence — five numbers read off the print rebuild it to 9.4 × 10⁻¹⁴ pixels, where a general three-view arrangement needs eighteen.
A symmetric object is its own stereo pair
A building with a plane of symmetry photographed once gives fourteen correspondences whose joining lines meet at one point to 1.9 × 10⁻¹² pixels, a skew-symmetric matrix, and the object's whole shape to fifteen digits — with no mirror anywhere and no second exposure. What it does not give is the size, and the instrument that decides whether any of it applies is the same meeting point, which opens to 12.7 pixels when the symmetry is half a per cent out.
Two wide pairs are most of a symmetry
A facade with a symmetric frame and an asymmetric middle is still its own stereo pair. Two pairs whose halves stand wide apart find the symmetry plane to 0.40° with marks read to 0.4 px; twelve pairs find it to 0.26°; two narrow pairs only to 1.35°. The middle that pairs with nothing comes back too, to 0.8 per cent, carried along its rays to the wall the pairs have fixed. The risk is not too little symmetry but a false pair — and a window set wider than its partner is one the standard test cannot see.
The wall convicts a pair set too wide
A window set wider than its partner's reflection keeps every joining line on the mirror's point, so the one test a symmetric photograph was known to carry cannot see it. The wall the other pairs fix can: it says where the partner should be seen, and a window set ten centimetres too wide misses by 6.0 pixels. With marks read to 0.4 px it convicts a 3-centimetre offset eight or nine times in ten and a 5-centimetre one every time. What no single photograph can see is a move along the camera's own ray to the window.
A false pair is named by its neighbours, not by itself
Read against the rest of a symmetric facade, a pair whose right half has moved six centimetres is explained exactly by two stories: the right half moved, or the left half moved the mirror way from a pair standing six centimetres over. Predicted from left to right and from right to left, the pair gives one residual twice. What names the half is a mark that shares a line with it — the window's upper corner names a move across ninety-three times in a hundred at two centimetres — and what the readings recover is the move as the camera sees it, blind along its ray.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
EpipoleStereo pairCorrespondenceFundamental matrixReconstructionReflectionscale ambiguityVirtual imageBaselineConditioningdegrees of freedomVanishing point