Theme

The thread: Determined up to something — page 2

Every recovery on this site returns an answer with a qualifier attached. One picture gives ratios and no size. Two give shape and no size. Many give a scene and a camera track up to seven numbers no quantity of pictures supplies. The qualifier is not a shortcoming to apologise for; it is the exact statement of what the pictures contain, and here it is counted, walked along and shown to be free rather than merely small. Essays 25 to 48 of 125.
the room, as it ismisses by 0.665 mthe room it is consistent withmeets to 1.5e-15 mdecimal places the rays agree tothe picture cannot be askedthe room can Systems that kept the measure

Counting the eyes needs the room

How many eyes made a picture is not a question the picture can be asked. Told what the room really measures, the rays refuse to meet and a second eye has been caught; told instead that the room is the one the picture is consistent with, the same rays meet exactly, at the first eye. The refusal is real and it belongs to the room.

the eyecorrect from 9 cm, at 160 mm wideoutlines agree to 6e-12 px Measuring from one picture

One picture of a ball

The outline of a ball in a photograph fixes the cone of rays that graze it, so the cone's axis is the direction of the ball's centre and its half-angle is the arcsine of radius over distance — both exactly, and neither of them separately. A ball a hundred and thirty-seven times larger, a hundred and thirty-seven times further away, draws the identical conic. And the drawn ellipse's own centre is not the image of the ball's.

0501000.2000.4000.600half the mirror's aperture (m)how wrong the fitted radius is (%)how wrong the answer ishow wrong the fit says it ismeasurement floor, 0.02°a paraboloid fitted to a sphere of radius 1.6 mhidden below 0.3 m of aperture · 0.030% of bias there Mirrors that are not cameras

A fitted radius is wrong before it is uncertain

A sphere and a paraboloid of the same vertex radius agree to second order, so a fit over a small aperture cannot separate them. What it does instead is return a confident radius that is wrong by a stated percentage, with a residual far below any measurement floor — 0.03% of bias behind a residual of three ten-thousandths of a degree. The residual only clears a two-hundredth of a degree at six times the aperture, by which point the bias is thirty-six times larger.

the seat the picture came fromthe screen, in planthe room sampledcurved monitor, 1 px of tolerance0.0% of the room inside The second projection

The screen that names the seat

A flat screen shows a homography of the intended picture from every seat in the room, and an observer's own framing is free to be a homography too — so a flat screen's picture is consistent with every seat there is. A curved one is not, and the seat comes back out of the picture in all three directions, in units of the screen's own radius.

-2e-7-1e-70-0.800-0.700-0.600-0.500α, the mix of the two nullspace directionsthe determinant that a fundamental matrix must make zeroa cubic with three real roots3 matrices, all exact The second eye

Seven marks, three answers

Seven correspondences leave a two-dimensional nullspace, and the requirement that a fundamental matrix be singular is a cubic in the mix — one or three real roots. Here it has three, and all three satisfy every one of the seven marks to 8.9 × 10⁻⁹ pixels. The eighth mark, withheld, separates them by more than an order of magnitude.

-0.10000.1002.5057.5010depth reported from the stepped disparity (m)height reported for each image row (m)the floor as it is35 platesspacing 3.9 cm → 1.95 mslope 1.997 What a pair is for

Whole pixels cut space into shells

A disparity read to whole pixels can report only the depths fB/k, so a stereo pair does not measure distance on a scale — it chooses among 113 shells between half a metre and twelve, 6.7 cm apart at two metres and 1.39 m apart at ten. A level floor comes back as 35 standing plates. And a finer step and a better reading are different purchases: at a quarter pixel with a quarter pixel of matcher error the pair prints 449 depths and can tell 149 apart.

floor: tilt 36.7°footstool: tilt 65.1°table: tilt 54.2°book: tilt 78.2°assumed camera 520 pxspread 41.4° What each system gave up

Four surfaces, and no one camera that draws them

Read under one assumed camera, the floor, footstool, table and book of a constructed divergent picture imply tilts of 36.7°, 65.1°, 54.2° and 78.2°, where one camera photographing four parallel surfaces gives each of them 35.0°. But the spread between the tilts is 46.8° under a 260 px lens and 6.7° under a 5,000 px one, so it measures the lens as much as the picture. The measure that owes nothing to a lens is on the page: the nearest drawing one camera could make moves the far corners by 17.6 px.

00.50011.50020406080field angle off the axis (degrees)picture radius, in focal lengthsfolds at 47.49°43.91°50.54°the radial factor reaches zeropinholefolds at 47.49°43.91° and 50.54° share one radius The real instrument

A barrel model folds at a radius it sets itself

The polynomial every calibration fits to a wide lens stops increasing at a radius fixed by its own first coefficient — 47.49° of field at k₁ = −0.28 — and past it two directions land on one picture radius. The routine that undistorts pictures with it does not refuse there. It hands back wrong directions from 46.75°, by as much as 106.5°, and refuses only at 65.5°: a fifth of the field returned silently wrong.

controlhow the shape moved, drawn 200× actual size — held: twelve surveyed coordinatessurvey 20 mm out · shape moved up to 2.26 mmreprojection 3.83e-1 px Many pictures at once

The eighth held number bends the scene

Four surveyed points, each 10 mm out in a different direction. Hold seven of their coordinates during an adjustment and the courtyard's shape moves by a trillionth of a millimetre; hold eight and it moves by 0.59 mm, because seven numbers choose a frame and the eighth makes a claim the pictures disagree with.

horizonABCDany vertexon the groundin the picturelength AB1.00011.3930ratio AB:CD0.56670.6837cross-ratio1.31681.3168correct from 26 cm, at 160 mm wide34° across What survives

Four lines have a cross-ratio

The cross-ratio is introduced as a property of four points on a line. Its dual — four lines through a point carry the same number, and any transversal reads it back — is not a second theorem. It is why the first one is true: four rays from an eye are a pencil, every picture of them is a section of that pencil, and a quantity belonging to the pencil cannot depend on which section was taken.

ground line — right from anywherefaint: intended · solid: seendeparture (mm) against height (m)01.38the error map is an elation, with the ground line as its axisno characteristic ratio — nothing off the axis is fixed250 mm sidewayszero on the axis, 212.5 mm at the top Where to stand

Where the anamorph still works

A picture correct from one point raises an obvious question that nobody answers with a number — how far may the eye move. The answer here is exact rather than approximate: a wrong viewpoint composes the intended picture with a central collineation whose axis is the line the picture stands on, so the error is zero along that line and grows linearly upward, and a step sideways costs precisely as much as the same step upward.

020406012345the baseline between the two eyes (metres)angle between the cone axes (°)42.6°two cones, one ballcentre to 9e-7° Measuring from one picture

Two pictures of a ball

Two outlines give two tangent cones, and where their axes cross is the ball's centre — with the radius following from either half-angle. There is no correspondence problem, because a ball's outline in one picture and its outline in another are guaranteed to be the same ball; and there is a degeneracy, which is the two eyes and the ball in a line, and the solver refuses it rather than returning something plausible.

-1012-0.25000.2500.5000.750how many pixels of departure are allowed, log₁₀the volume of acceptable seats, log₁₀ cm³11×4 mm184×58 mmcurved monitor, the acceptable seats as a solidfitted exponent 2.978 against a cube law's 3 The second projection

The seats a screen will accept

Collect the seats whose picture is within a pixel of the one intended and the result is a solid — half a cubic centimetre in front of a curved desk monitor, a litre in front of a curved television. Ten times the tolerance is a thousand times the room, which is the pavement anamorph's own law arriving on an object that has nothing else in common with it.

the pavement implies a horizon 171 px off the topthe horizon the panel drewcorrect from 12 cm at 160 mm wide9.2 px from the truth, 0.17 px from a perspective Drawn confidently

The rule that draws another room

The taught rule for spacing receding boards — each gap a fixed fraction of the last — is not a projection of anything, and it produces a pavement that is a correct perspective to within a fifth of a pixel. Of a room whose horizon is a hundred and seventy pixels from the one the panel drew. The error is not incoherence; it is a disagreement between two halves of one drawing.

both explain both photographs exactly11.4 m apart, median The second eye

The surface two pictures cannot separate

There is a quadric through both camera centres on which two genuinely different motions draw identical pictures. Built explicitly, forty-two marks satisfy both epipolar geometries to 2 × 10⁻¹³ pixels, and the two scenes they reconstruct place the same mark at 15.6 metres and 35.1. The design matrix's nullspace has two dimensions rather than one, which is the seven-point situation arrived at from the other side.

the lenscorrect from 14 cm, at 160 mm wide12 pairs · 2.8e-13 px Mirrors that are not cameras

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.

each point joined to its place in the inside-out answer — nearer the camera is uptoward the cameratrue 2.4e-13 px · inside out 0.946 px3° field, 60° of arc Many pictures at once

A narrow view keeps a second answer, inside out

Six pictures of a courtyard through a 3° field, every mark exact. Started from the scene turned inside out, the adjustment settles there — near points far, far points near — and misfits the marks by under a pixel. The misfit grows in proportion to the field and to the sweep of the cameras, and vanishes only where perspective does.

0240.50011.50tolerance allowed in the redraw (px, log scale)fewest cameras the picture needs3 at 4.63 px2 at 11.11 px1 at 17.63 px4 surfacesone camera at 17.63 px What each system gave up

A camera count needs a tolerance

Asked how few cameras could have drawn a splayed picture, a constructed stack answers four, three, two or one depending on how many pixels of redrawing a reader will allow — one camera at 17.6 px, two at 11.1, three at 4.6. The count is real: a picture built with two groups hidden in it gives back exactly those two, anywhere between nothing and 47.0 px. What it is not is a property of the picture alone, and the floor under it belongs to the hand — a one-camera drawing made by a hand that scatters its far corners by σ splits below about 0.57σ, where the 0.57 belongs to that hand and runs from 0.17 to 1.34 across a hundred and twenty of them.

axis — the ground line, fixed pointwisecentreaxisthe ground linefixed pointwisecentre(0.150, 4.020)height + distanceratio-1.481481−distance / heightheight × aspect = 2.592, and neither aloneeye recovered to 4.8e-12 mmeye 1.62 m up, 2.40 m backthree numbers back to the eye: 2.2e-16 m Where to stand

The marks name the place, not the height

Run the camera-recovery round trip on an anamorph — hand it the floor marks and ask for the eye back — and it returns the spot on the floor to eleven decimal places with nothing assumed at all. It does not return the height. What the marks fix is the product of the eye's height with the design's aspect ratio, and no amount of looking at the floor separates the two.

front view · 32 filledtop view · 36 filledside view · 36 filledthe largest solid with these views — 192 cellsand a solid with the same views — 64 cells6 × 6 × 6 cellsthe three views are identical; the solids differ by 128 cells The other systems

Three views do not fix the solid

A stepped block on a six-cell grid draws a front, a top and a side view. So does a solid with a third of its material, and so does one with more than the block has — 192 cells against 64, every filled square in all three views identical. The drawing office's triple bounds a part between two solids and does not determine it, and the gap runs to a factor of n.

a flat floor3e-13 mma homology — four points determine ita dished floor5.67 mmnot a homologya ridged floor9.07 mmnot a homologya floor with a step74.95 mmnot a homologyworst error of the predicted pointsexact at the four fitted, on every surface Light and mirrors

The floor that is not a plane

A shadow on a flat floor is a homology, so four marks determine the whole map and the rest of the outline comes back exactly. Dish the floor and the same four marks mispredict the rest by 5.67 mm; ridge it and 9.07 mm; put a step in it — two planes, each of them exactly a homology — and 74.95 mm. The receiver's shape is what breaks the projective description, and it breaks it worst where the surface is flattest.

apart by 6.4e-11 pxcorrect from 17 cm, at 160 mm wideone eye again Systems that kept the measure

A parallel floor under a perspective room

Draw the floor without diminution and the people on it with it, and the picture has a centre at infinity glued to a centre in the room. The same map absorbs it — but there is no shear this time, and there cannot be: bringing a point in from infinity is not something an affine map does, so the room the picture is equally a picture of has its midpoints moved as well as its angles.

hull 3.1098 · object 2.9193 · floor 3.07498 outlinesthe notch survives all of them Measuring from one picture

The dish no outline reaches

An outline is a pair of numbers per direction and nothing more, so a shape built from outlines has two errors that behave differently. The part outside the convex hull falls as one over the square of the view count. The part inside a concavity is the same area at four views and at a hundred and twenty-eight, because no pair of supporting lines ever reaches into a bite.

0102030400123how wide the audience is (m)the worst seat, in pixels of departure14.1 px per metrea flat panel of the same sizecurved television, the best single pre-warpthe flat panel's line is the axis The second projection

One picture and three people

A curved screen can be pre-warped for one seat, and the search over which seat to choose returns the middle one to a quarter of a per cent — there is nothing to be clever about. What the correction buys the sofa as a whole is six per cent, and the worst seat grows at fourteen pixels for every metre of audience, with no width at which it is zero except one person.

All themes