Theme

The thread: Fitted, not assumed — page 3

A distortion coefficient recovered from bent lines with no calibration target. A principal point computed instead of guessed to be the middle of the frame. A pivot offset read off the parallax it leaves behind. Each is the site's round trip pointed at a quantity that is usually filled in from a manual, and each comes with the conditioning number that says how well the data actually determined it. Essays 49 to 72 of 175.
correct from 15 cm, at 160 mm widefive figures · 100% rank Systems that kept the measure

Size that means rank

In a great many pictures the drawn height records importance rather than distance. That is a decision rather than a mistake, and it can be caught with a straightedge by carrying one figure's height across the room by the taught construction and see where it lands. A tenth of rank in the picture already misses the drawn head by 21 px, the miss is exactly linear in how much rank is there, and the whole test needs two references and no arithmetic.

21 of 36 tiles still countablethe floor starts 18 m away Measuring from one picture

Counting is a measurement

A tiled floor gives its area with no reference length at all — count the tiles and multiply. The count is an integer, so it is exact wherever it can be made, which is a completely different error law from the rectifier's smooth decay. And the distance at which it fails is set by the tile's depth edge, which foreshortens as one over the depth squared, so 18.7 m for a 62 cm tile, where the across edge alone would have allowed 217.

050100204060how far the third eye stands from the point, in metreshow far the answer is from the truth, in millimetresnearest in metresleast reprojection error120 noise draws averaged at each station132 vs 34 mm What a pair is for

A third ray is worth what its picture is worth

Three eyes on one point, two at seven metres and one walked back to seventy. The point nearest all three rays in metres is 132 millimetres from the truth and the point of least reprojection error is 34 — the same 34 the near pair gives alone — and the first is pulled 12 millimetres along the line to the distant eye. And arrangement beats count outright — two rays spread over fifty-five degrees beat eight rays inside four, by a factor of 4.4.

00.50011.5020123where a pinhole would put the point, in focal lengths from the centrewhere the model puts itwhere the polynomial foldsthe division model's horizonboth at k = -0.42fold 42° · horizon 1.54 The real instrument

A model that inverts has a horizon instead of a fold

The polynomial every calibration fits turns around at a finite radius and stops being a map from direction to picture. The division model, chosen because it inverts in closed form, never turns around — it rises for ever toward a horizon at one over the root of its own coefficient, so the whole hemisphere of directions lands inside a finite disc. Fitted to the four fisheye laws it follows every one of them more closely than the polynomial at every field from forty degrees to eighty — a hundred times more closely for the equidistant law at forty, and the stereographic law exactly.

89°in plan · the mark's size is the angle at the pointthe track covers 60° Many pictures at once

The spread a point gets

A track of sixty degrees gives no point of the scene sixty degrees. The nearest receive 89 and the furthest 41, a factor of 2.2, and their errors run from 1.5 to 8.4 millimetres — following the angle at the point as its −1.68 power, with 94 per cent of the variation explained. The arc a track covers is one number for forty-four different situations and predicts none of them.

horizonprincipal pointv_zorthocentre: 812.7691 px · vᵀωu = 0: 812.7691 pxconjugacy residual 5.9e-10 in focal-length unitscorrect from 19 cm, at 160 mm wide46° across What survives

One conic calibrates the camera

A focal length is usually recovered from two perpendicular vanishing points by an orthocentre construction with a square root in it. There is a second derivation with no construction and no square root — two vanishing points of perpendicular directions must be conjugate with respect to one conic in the picture — and the two agree to the last bit. They are not two methods. The conic is what a calibrated camera is.

05010015020011.502log₁₀ of the lamp's distance (m)pixels the recovered foot sits below the horizonthe sun: on the horizonthe recovered height stays exactwhat falls off is the evidence that the light is finite Light and mirrors

A light far enough away

The evidence in a photograph that its light is in the room rather than at infinity is one number — how far below the horizon the shadow lines put the light's foot. It falls off as one over the distance, from 211 px at 4 m to 10.8 px at 266 m, while the recovered height stays exact to 5e-13 of itself. What fails first is not the arithmetic; it is the evidence, and one pixel of error costs 0.21 mm of height at the near end and 0.07 m at the far one.

in section, two of the three facesworst 0.0e+0° Mirrors that are not cameras

The corner that answers every eye

Three mirrors at right angles compose into the point inversion, so a ray entering leaves antiparallel to itself whatever direction it arrived from — a picture surface with no correct viewpoint because every viewpoint is correct. Tilt one face half a degree and the worst returning ray is out by exactly one degree, twice the error; the best is out by a twelfth of it, which is why a tolerance quoted from one measured ray is a statement about that ray.

010200.8000.90011.101.20the assumed aspect, as a multiple of the true onethe error — degrees for the angle, per cent for the lengththe angle, in degreesa length into the pictureone wrong assumption, three quantitiesshape and size are different facts Measuring from one picture

An angle on the ground

An angle needs no length at all — it is scale-free, so the one thing a single view cannot give is not the thing an angle wants. What it wants instead is the plane's shape, and the difference is measurable — assume the reference rectangle's aspect a quarter wrong and the angle moves 11.5°, a length running into the picture is out by exactly that quarter, and a length along the reference's own direction does not move at all.

eyethe stickcorrect from 18 cm, at 160 mm widerays miss by 3.13 mm Through water and glass

The stick a stereo pair puts back

Two eyes side by side reconstruct a submerged stick exactly as the sagittal image — kinked 14.96° — and two eyes one above the other exactly as the tangential one, kinked 9.59°. Roll the baseline between them and the two rays to a point miss each other by up to 3.13 millimetres, past the 2.85 a pixel covers at that range, and the reconstruction is a third stick that is neither — 551 millimetres of a one-metre stick, with its tip at 0.405 metres against a true 0.866.

0102030400.2000.4000.6000.800where along the edge, as a fraction of the visible lengthshare of the edge's response to the coefficient, in per cent93% outside the middle halfone edge, 82 marks, cut into tenthsmiddle two tenths: 1.4% The real instrument

The response is at the ends and the information is not

A radial map bows a straight edge by an amount that grows as the square of the distance along it, so 93 per cent of an edge's response to the coefficient lies in its outer quarters. Spending the marks there is 16 per cent worse than spreading them evenly, because two clusters say nothing a shifted, tilted line could not say. What identifies the coefficient is a curvature, which needs three places — both ends and the middle, which beats an even spread by 11 per cent.

2.7:13.1:14.5:15.8:17.2:1in plan; ellipses at 8σworst 7.2:1 Measuring from one picture

The answer is an ellipse

A mark read with a round error does not come back as a round region on the ground. The ray is grazing, so a pixel across the picture is worth a little and a pixel up it is worth a great deal, and the recovered point's uncertainty is an ellipse pointing at the camera — 5.07 to 1 at eight metres from a camera 1.62 m up, which is the depth over the height. Propagated and sampled agree to 0.5 per cent, and a ray that is not grazing gives a disc.

0.313100510how far away the subject is, in metreshow far the pupil moves forward, in millimetres0.50 mthe whole walk with field anglea 50 mm lens, focused as one pieceequal at 0.50 m The real instrument

Focusing moves the pivot past its best place

Focusing a fifty-millimetre lens to one metre carries its entrance pupil 2.63 millimetres forward of the camera body, and to half a metre 5.56 — which is more than the whole 5.53 that the pupil walks with field angle, so past a subject at 502 millimetres the focus decides where the pupil is. A panorama head aligned at infinity and used at a metre leaves 7.46 arcminutes along its seam; aligned at four metres it leaves 2.21, better than pivoting at the pupil at all.

012204060how far off the axis the read directions reach, in degreeshow far the recovered wedge angle is out, in degreesthe wedge's own angle — nothing recovered60 trials at each spread, half a pixel of reading error0.068° at 55° Through water and glass

The wedge recovered with the camera

Admit the glass into the model and the fit finally has something left over. A two-degree wedge is invisible to a reading confined inside eighteen degrees of the axis — the fit calls the whole displacement a rotation of the camera and is right to — and by fifty-five degrees it comes back to 0.07 of a degree. What the picture does not separate is the ordinary glasses — assuming an index of 1.50 for a true 1.52 costs one per cent in the angle and 0.07 pixels of residual.

floorsplay 1.12q = 1.000footstoolsplay 1.2q = 1.000tablesplay 1.32q = 1.000booksplay 1.38q = 1.000one habit, four splays — each strip's rows read from the page aloneone hand fits at q = 1.000 What each system gave up

The rows count hands, not cameras

Rows drawn between two straight sides charge a camera nothing — every strip of a four-strip divergent picture reads back as a flat plane, whatever placed them, so a single viewpoint redraws the whole picture exactly. What they do fix is one number per strip, and that number survives the lens. Read the same drawing at focal lengths twenty to one apart and the lean runs from 36.4° to 86.0° while the habit stays at 1.000000000.

share of the 70° field counted as cloud — the truth is 10.31%equal-area fisheye10.31% (-0.0%)equidistant fisheye9.37% (-9.1%)stereographic7.56% (-26.6%)flat plane2.40% (-76.8%)401² of picture, four caps of cloud0.01% on the equal-area rule, -77% on the flat plane Surfaces that are not flat

Counting cloud by counting pixels

A sky camera looks up and something counts the white pixels. On an equal-area fisheye that answer is right to 0.01%, which is the grid's own error. On an equidistant one it is 9% low, on stereographic 27% low, and on an ordinary flat lens 77% low — against a cover that is known exactly, because the clouds here are caps whose solid angles add. Weighting each pixel by the surface's area scale repairs every one of them to better than a fifth of a per cent.

isometricdimetrictrimetricelevationx scalez scalea curve, not a squarethe third scale is not free The other systems

The dimetric the set square draws

An orthographic direction has two parameters and produces three axis scales, so the achievable triples are a surface rather than a list. The drawing office's dimetric — one axis at 1 in 8, the other at 7 in 8 — has the right three scales exactly and the wrong two angles, and the picture it makes is an oblique projection of a cube rather than an orthographic one.

-2024-0.500-0.25000.2500.500where the viewer sits, as a fraction of the sitting distance (log₁₀)the two eyes' vertical disagreement, in arcminutes (log₁₀)15′ fusion limitthe raw differencewhat a common frame leavesthe sitting distancecurved monitor, against the chairlimit at 29 cm The second projection

The distance at which the eyes part

The two eyes' disagreement on a curved screen was measured at each screen's own sitting distance and reported as a null result. The sitting distance is a parameter and the chair moves — swept, the raw difference falls like the cube of it and the residual like the fourth power, and a viewer twenty-nine centimetres from a curved monitor crosses the fusion limit the null result was quoted against.

0.6000.7000.800010203040generations of copyingthe drawing's depth-spacing ratiocopying the methodcopying the marksone hand error, two kinds of copyist9 lineages Systems that kept the measure

What survives being copied

A workshop copying a drawing from a drawing is a random walk — the spread across lineages grows as the square root of the generation, with a fitted exponent of 0.5001. A workshop copying the method is not, and its exponent is 0.012, which is no growth at all, and after forty generations two lineages started from different originals end up 5 × 10⁻¹⁵ apart. Copying the marks loses the picture; copying the recipe loses the original and keeps the recipe.

near and short3.68%0.5 m, 126 pxnear and long2.84%4.0 m, 1088 pxat the unknown's depth3.95%1.4 m, 154 pxfar and long8.36%5.2 m, 241 pxthe spread of the answer, per candidateshorter is better Measuring from one picture

Which reference to measure from

Given four candidate scale bars in one photograph, the best is not the longest and not the nearest — it is the longest in the picture. A five-point-two metre bar near the horizon is the longest thing in the scene and the worst reference in it; a four metre bar close to the camera is the best. Walk one bar outward and the term it controls falls as one over its length in pixels, with a fitted exponent of −1.08.

the true planefirst number of the plane, from the true valuesecond44 points in front: 31.9 % of the slicethe third number held at its true value The second eye

Seeing the scene fences in the plane at infinity

A reconstruction made without the calibration does not know which of its planes is infinitely far away. Requiring every point to lie in front of both cameras rules out every candidate that would tear the courtyard, and what is left is a convex region — 32 per cent of a generous slice — that always holds the true plane and never shrinks to it.

0100200300distance from the picture's centre, pxeach edge, by how far it passes from the centreoffset 20 px20–326offset 60 px60–330offset 125 px125–348offset 180 px180–372four edges, 82 marks eachevery one spans 16× in radius The real instrument

No design separates the two coefficients

Separating a squared term from a fourth-power one was supposed to need marks at radii far apart, which is a statement about where edges are placed. It is not: one straight edge already runs from 20 px to 326. Spreading ninety-six marks over three edges or sixteen changes the answer by 23 per cent, spreading the offsets makes it 19 per cent worse, and the correlation stays at −0.98 whatever is done. What a plumb-line calibration determines is one number, to 1.52 thousandths, and which number depends on the model.

the stickreconstructedfitted straightbaseline rolled 45°residual 0.2 mm Through water and glass

The residual does not warn

Fit a straight line to the stick a stereo pair puts back and the fit looks best exactly where the reconstruction is least supported: the residual is 0.535 mm at a level baseline, where the two rays meet perfectly, and 0.038 mm at sixty degrees of roll, inside the band where they miss by more than a pixel covers. Over the same sweep the fitted line is 285 to 584 mm short of the stick's metre — fourteen thousand times its own residual at worst.

the shared vanishing line, 22.0°four surfaces, four turns, one camera6e-12 px apart What each system gave up

A vanishing line with a slope in it

Turn the plane about the view direction and no family of any surface's edges is level; each vanishing line acquires a slope, and a group must agree about two numbers rather than one. The count does not change character — a hand of four pixels costs the test 3.00 px at no slope and 3.27 at thirty-eight degrees of it. What the slope does expose is the redraw: holding each far edge at its drawn height charges 0.95 px to a picture one camera really took.

All themes