necessary, not sufficient — where it appears
Named by 4 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Dividing depth by eye
Three methods for spacing a receding row, all of them taught, all of them wrong. Read back as distances, the best misplaces a post by 3.5 metres in a row that is supposed to be spaced 1.4. And the obvious way of checking them gives one of the three a perfect score.
What happens behind the eye
A point behind the camera has a perfectly plausible image. Dividing by a negative fourth coordinate flips both signs, so the point lands through the principal point on the far side of the frame, and a segment crossing the eye plane is drawn straight, inside the frame, and running in exactly the opposite direction — a direction cosine of −1.0000.
Each system answers its own question
A comparison in which every system wins its own column proves nothing if the columns were chosen after the systems. The test that makes it a result is whether any system wins something it was not designed for — and two of them do.
The pixel that is not square
A camera with two focal lengths is a real thing — anamorphic cinema optics, non-square photosites, a stretched video format. Hand this site's own round trip a picture from one and it returns a focal length 49.6% out, a principal point far from the truth, three independent estimates agreeing to 1e-16, and bundle residuals at the noise floor. Every alarm the site has stays silent.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
DemonstrationCamera matrixCross ratio testResidualAnisotropyAspect ratioAxis scaleCamera calibrationcentre of projectionClip spaceConformalDegeneracy