Theme

The thread: Fitted, not assumed — page 4

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 73 to 96 of 104.
vanishing point 1vanishing point 2where the camera wasassumed centre 50% alongfocal 1129.9 px · 0.283 : 1 Constructing a view

The arc every eye stands on

Four drawn corners known to be a rectangle fix the horizon of their plane and nothing else. The eye that drew them has to see the two vanishing points at a right angle, so it lies on the circle those points are a diameter of — and every point of that arc reconstructs a genuine rectangle, with right angles to five parts in ten million million of a degree, and a different proportion.

-500500.5001distance to the thing being stitched (log₁₀ metres)what the stitch leaves behind (px)2.86 m80 mm baselinezero at one depth each Surfaces that are not flat

A rig is right on one surface

Several cameras looking outward have several centres, and no warp registers all of a scene. The residual is a disparity, so the depth the stitch is computed for has an exact optimum — the harmonic midpoint of the depth range, not the middle of it — and the arithmetic middle costs a factor of 2 z_far over the sum, which tends to two.

00.2500.5000.750120406080assumed centre of the picture, % of the way between the vanishing pointsreconstructed proportion of the rectanglethe rectangle that was there, 0.667 : 115.7× across the arcevery one a true rectangle Constructing a view

The proportion is the assumption

Read the proportions of a rectangle out of a photograph of it and the answer is a function of where the centre of the picture is assumed to be. Sweeping that assumption across the horizon takes one drawn quadrilateral from one part in fourteen to slightly wider than square, every reconstruction a genuine rectangle, and only a fiftieth of the sweep within five per cent of the truth.

-200200204060position around the occluder's outlinehow far the four-point map mispredicts, signed (mm)a dished floor (k = 0.289)a ridged floor (k = 0.183)a floor with a step (k = 0.040)matched at 25.00 mm worstdish 0.1% · ridge 2.8% · step 19.4% Light and mirrors

The residual has a shape

A flat-floor map mispredicts a shadow by millimetres on any floor that is not flat, and the number everybody quotes is the worst one. Tune a dish, a ridge and a step until all three mispredict by exactly 25.0 millimetres and the scalar can no longer tell them apart — by construction. The signed residual around the ring still can. The second harmonic of it reads 0.09%, 2.79% and 19.37%, a factor of two hundred across three floors the headline number calls identical.

02.5e+35e+37.5e+31e+4200400600800one corner, slid along the picture (px)focal length the quadrilateral implies (px)admitted to 886 pxrefused past 903 px Constructing a view

The quadrilateral no rectangle casts

The relation that reads a camera out of a drawn rectangle has a minus sign in it, and the minus sign is a refusal: two vanishing points on the same side of the assumed centre give the square root of a positive number, and no camera makes that quadrilateral out of a rectangle. Watching the refusal arrive shows what it is worth — one corner has to travel most of the picture's width before it fires.

00.2500.5000.75012345how high the eye is (m)share of the object, and share of the design that landsof the object's surfaceof the design that landsa corridor with a doorway, 7 facesbest surface share 100% at 2.5 m Where to stand

The eye that reaches the most

A higher eye buys the faces occlusion was hiding and loses design off the far end of the object, so "the best eye" is not a question with an answer until somebody says which of the two they are paying for. On three objects the answer is as high as possible; on a corridor with a doorway in it the two quantities cross and the best height is two and a bit metres.

01002000.80011.20the condition, as a fraction of what makes the picture exacthow far a mark is from where it was drawn to be seen, in arcminutesthe seatthe horizontal scalethe vertical lawcurved television, one condition at a timeall three linear Surfaces that are not flat

Three conditions, and three prices

A matched picture needs the seat, the horizontal scale and the vertical law all at once. Each is broken alone here with the other two held, and all three turn out to be linear in the mismatch — the unforgiving case, with no margin at all. The vertical law costs a third of an arcminute on a television and eighty-four on a dome, because it is the difference between an angle and its tangent and that difference is cubic in the picture's vertical field.

cylinderexactequirectangular0.18′equidistant fisheye0.73′equal-area fisheye0.82′stereographic0.99′flat plane1.79′curved television, from its matched seateach surface fitted to it Surfaces that are not flat

The surface a screen wants

Six picture surfaces laid on one screen and viewed from the seat its curvature names, each with its own extents fitted so the ranking is about shape rather than scale. Each screen's own surface is exactly right on it and nothing else is — and on a curved television the runner-up is a fifth of an arcminute behind, which nobody can see.

drawn along a fixed direction, not from a pointelevation 52°centre-fit refused Systems that kept the measure

What a removed wall costs that a removed roof does not

Fitting a single centre to a building with its near wall deleted lands at 3.0e-15 m — the arithmetic floor — because deleting a wall does not touch the projection, only which surfaces are drawn. Fitting the identical routine to the same building with its roof removed does not return a number at all: handed a bundle of genuinely parallel rays, it refuses outright.

2 transversalsnoneunfalsifiable3 transversalsnoneunfalsifiable4 transversals15 transversals26 transversals38 transversals510 transversals713 transversals1017 transversals14independent statements a pavement makesthree unknowns, one equation per mark Constructing a view

Four marks before anything is said

A reader fitting a correct perspective to a row of transversals has three numbers to choose, so three transversals fit whatever they are and the fourth is the first that can disagree. Below that count a pavement is unfalsifiable, and a great many painted pavements are below it.

the horizonthe centre, 318focal 622.396 pxtrue 622.396 px What survives

Perpendicular is a pairing

On a horizon, the vanishing point of a direction and the vanishing point of the direction at right angles to it are joined by a map that is its own inverse. Such a map has two degrees of freedom rather than three, so two pairs determine it — and its two imaginary fixed points are the focal length and the centre of the picture, handed back from two rectangles on one floor with nothing assumed.

horizoncorrect from 19 cm, at 160 mm wide2 centres · 2.12 px Light and mirrors

How many lamps a drawing has

The shadow field recovers a lamp by intersecting drawn lines. Two lamps make that a partition rather than an intersection — and two centres fit any bundle better than one, on a one-lamp drawing as readily as on a two-lamp one, so a count is a decision that needs a noise level before it exists. A criterion built on a penalty instead of a noise level returns four.

02.5057.5010020406080how far the floor is folded from flat (°)what a 10 cm error in the height leaves (mm)two degrees: 0.58 mma design 1.4 m wide, the eye 1.62 m up, the crease at 1.2 mflat: 1.5e-13 mm · 90°: 9.3 mm Where to stand

A fold names the height

A pavement anamorph’s marks fix where the reader must stand and leave how tall they are entirely free — every height explains the marks exactly, to the last bit. Put one crease in the floor and the freedom is gone, because two degrees of fold makes a ten-centimetre error in the height leave six tenths of a millimetre, and a right angle makes it nine.

the distance pointone mark on the horizonleaves another exact drawingAlberti's sectionone mark per braccio, each from the panelleaves errors each its ownthe measuring pointdividers walked along the measuring lineleaves errors that accumulatea photographnoneleaves a smooth curvethe constant ratioone ratio, applied throughoutleaves a smooth curveone hand step eachand four kinds of trace Constructing a view

One hand step each

Every classical perspective construction has exactly one step a person performs by hand, and the four constructions perform four different steps. That single difference decides everything a finished drawing can say about its maker, because the answers are identical and only the mistakes are not.

-4-3-2-1000.50011.502how much more effort, log₁₀ of the controlhow much of the error is left, log₁₀ of the first samplepanorama-seam · −0.92panorama-vertical · floorsilhouette-hull · −2.00silhouette-notch · flooranamorph-sagitta · −2.30anamorph-sagitta-intervals · −2.00mirrorball-size · −1.007 laws, 12 samples each2 with a floor · 5 without What survives

An error with two terms

Two results from machineries with nothing in common have now found the same shape. A panorama's parallax separates into a term that halves every time the frame count doubles and a term with no frame count in it at all; a silhouette's error into an excess that falls as one over the square of the view count and the area of a concavity that is the same number at four views and at a hundred and twenty-eight. Fitting both terms turns the distinction into a measurement, and pointed at seven of this collection's own laws it reads every one of them the way its own essay does.

00.2500.5000.7501-1-0.50000.500how far apart the lamps are, log₁₀ metreshow often the drawing is read as two lampshalf the drawings1 px of clicking, 12 drawings each, separated across the viewbelow the crossing the second lamp is not in the picture Light and mirrors

The distance at which two lamps part

Two lamps five centimetres apart are one lamp, and the drawing is right to say so. The separation at which they become two is proportional to how carelessly the picture was clicked — 3.6 centimetres at half a pixel, 7.2 at one, 28 at four — with no floor anywhere, so nothing but care stands between a reader and any separation at all.

0.4000.6000.80011.201.40braccia in the pavement (log₁₀)the worst departure of a mark, in pixels (log₁₀)steppedmeasured from the zerothe same hand, laid off two ways√n against n^0.21 Constructing a view

Stepped, or measured from the zero

The same hand at the same precision, laying the same braccia off two ways — dividers walked from the last mark accumulate and grow as the square root of the count, while marks set from a common origin do not accumulate at all. The difference is not which method was used — it is where the zero is, and only the second is recorded in the drawing.

05101520123how many decades of the control were sweptlargest floor the data cannot rule out (% of the first sample)everything in here is still possiblea floor-free law at 1% noise21.5% at 0.3 decades · 0.00% at 3 What survives

What a null result is worth in decades

The first draft of this expected a short sweep to invent a floor, on the reasoning that least squares always spends a free parameter. It does not — on exact data the fitted floor of a floor-free law comes back at three parts in a quadrillion. The failure is the other one and it is worse because it looks like a result. Over a third of a decade at one per cent noise, floors of a fifth of the first sample are still consistent with the data, and the fit reports none while telling the truth.

wrong hzcorrectno shapefrom a zerosteppeda rulethe distance pointAlberti's sectionthe measuring pointa photographthe constant ratio60144157203036060read with the panel's own horizon60 drawings each Constructing a view

What a panel says about its maker

The reading assembled over this row, run against every procedure sixty times and scored — with the failures reported as carefully as the successes, because three of the five rows are refusals. A drawing names the class of error in it, not the recipe that produced it, and one procedure it never names at all.

face 15.75×1.00× parallelface 21.41×1.00× parallelface 31.34×1.00× parallelface 41.13×1.00× parallelface 51.05×1.00× parallelface 61.03×1.00× parallelface 71.00×1.00× parallelface 81.00×1.00× parallelthe spread of scale within one faceparallel: 1.000000× The other systems

One face, one scale

A design carried from a point onto a flat face varies in scale by nearly six across that one face; the same design carried along a direction varies by 1.000000000. The stretch is reported here as the two singular values of the local map rather than as one directional difference, which is the honest form and which the previous round owed.

0204060204060how oblique the view of the plane is (°)what one pixel costs, against its cost at 20°a ratio of lengths — affinean angle — metric1 px on four corners, one homographya cross-ratio moves by 0e+0 What survives

The ladder of assumptions is a ladder of conditioning

Push the four corners of a board by one pixel and read three quantities through the one recovered map. A cross-ratio does not move at all — it is read in the picture and never went through the map. A ratio of parallel lengths moves by a tenth of a per cent at twenty degrees of obliquity and by 1.6 per cent at seventy-eight. An angle moves by sixteen thousandths of a degree and by nine tenths. The stratification ladder is usually taught as a hierarchy of what is assumed; it is also a hierarchy of what a pixel costs.

how clearly each line belongs to one pencil2 lamps, 5 posts251.5 px100% assigned right3 lamps, 5 posts12.1 px73% assigned right4 lamps, 5 posts38.6 px40% assigned right0.5 px of clicking, lamps spread over 2 mthe counting of unknowns cannot see this Light and mirrors

The drawing does not run out of lines

Every post supplies a line to every lamp, so a drawing of five posts offers ten lines to two lamps and twenty to four — the unknowns and the constraints grow together and two posts fix any number of lights. What runs out is the partition, whose margin falls from 251 pixels to six as the share of lines assigned correctly falls from all to just over half.

-1.50-1-0.50000.50011.5022.50how far back the eye stands, in object radii (log₁₀)how far a mark lands from where the direction puts it, in metres (log₁₀)one design samplethe faces settlethe marks settlea seating rake, from a point and from a direction3 radii against 34 The other systems

Two distances to infinity

A parallel projection is the limit of a perspective one, and the limit arrives twice. Which faces get painted settles within three object radii, because a face is either round the back or it is not; where each mark lands falls like one over the distance and is still out at thirty-four. Far enough away has two answers an order of magnitude apart.

-3-2-1010123how many measurements are averaged, log₁₀the error in the recovered height, log₁₀ mmthe spread — -0.52the bias — flat, and microns1 px on the clicked topspread 0.177 mm at m = 1024, bias 20.0 µm What survives

The bias out of reach

A single-view height recovered from the cross-ratio has an error with two terms. The spread of an average of m readings falls as one over the root of m, by a fitted exponent of −0.52 over three decades. The bias does not fall at all — and it is eight microns, against a single-shot spread of six millimetres, so the two cross at 535,000 measurements. There is a floor here and no experiment anybody will run can see it.

All themes