The thread: One machine used twice — page 3
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.
Through water and glassA ball of water has no eye either
A flat interface is not a projection through a centre and misses by ten millimetres. A sphere of water misses by more than that on a ball the size of a plum — 1.3 mm on a fifty-millimetre radius, and the axis crossings spread over 18.6 mm at seven tenths of the aperture. But at two per cent of the radius the same fit returns 24 nanometres, so a ball does have a centre — one at zero aperture and none by the time it is gathering any light.
The eye that movesA scroll through two slits ranges in a straight line
Draw a scroll twice, through a slit leaning 10° forward along the track and one leaning 10° back, and every point appears in both drawings on the same row, separated by 9.169 px for every metre of its depth — at four metres and at fifty-two. Depth is proportional to that separation rather than reciprocal to it, so a pixel of error costs 10.9 cm at every distance, averaging leaves no bias, and there is no range past which the depth runs off to infinity. The price is paid in roll: a 100 m scroll ranges nothing past 283.6 m.
The other systemsThree 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.
Light and mirrorsThe 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.
Systems that kept the measureA 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.
The rectangle behind the lensThe disc and the streak
A frame integrates over the pupil and over the exposure at once. Hold the point's depth and the patch is exactly the streak of its centres with one disc slid along it, to 1.8 × 10⁻⁵ of its own width. Let it recede over the same exposure and the disc's radius falls by 3.7 along the streak, and the patch departs from any single kernel by 16 pixels.
The eye that movesA scroll round a bend loses its straight-line depth
Draw a scroll through two slits leaning ±10° from a track that bends, and the separation that was 9.169 px for every metre of depth stops being proportional. Outside a 100 m bend it is 653.8 px at 256 m where a straight track gives 2347, and it never passes 907.6 px however deep the point; inside a 200 m bend it runs nearly three times ahead of depth and no slit reaches past 165.3 m. The two drawings still share their rows, and the scale along the roll becomes a function of depth.
What each system gave upOne camera means one horizon, not one point
The test this field has been using asks whether a picture's surfaces share a meeting point. One camera photographing four parallel surfaces turned by different angles in their own planes gives them meeting points 1,065 px apart in column and identical in height to 3 × 10⁻¹² px — so the shared-point test charges 28.7 px to a picture one camera really took, and the charge grows with the turn. What one camera imposes is a shared vanishing line. The earlier verdicts survive intact, and for a narrower reason than they looked to have.
Light and mirrorsA shadow across an edge
A straight rod's shadow crossing the crease between floor and wall is two straight pieces, each dead straight to 1e-15 m, meeting at 35.08°. The corner is a fact about the room and not about the rod. Fit the floor's map from four marks and apply it across the whole shadow and the part on the wall comes back up to 78.9 cm from the object — the wrong map, applied confidently.
Constructing a viewThe bay repeated by a straightedge
Draw one bay, then repeat it by diagonals alone — no measurement, no scale, no arithmetic — and after twelve bays the constructed corners sit 1e-12 px from the corners the camera projects. It is exact because the operation being iterated is a homology of the picture, not because the draughtsman was careful, and that separates it from every construction in this site's `wrong` field.
The second projectionWhat the two eyes are sent
A reader's eyes are two seats sixty-three millimetres apart, so a curved screen delivers each of them a different map — and the part of the difference no homography absorbs is binocular evidence of the glass. Turned into a depth it comes back as the screen's own sag, 49 millimetres against 47 on a television, by a route that never saw the radius.
What a machine computesOne depth per sample is not enough
A depth buffer keeps a single distance at each sample, so a post-process blur can only ask how far away the thing at this pixel is. Across an occluding edge that answer is two depths and an occlusion, and the gather it produces differs from the pupil's own integral by 70 per cent of full scale over a band eleven pixels wide.
Drawn confidentlyA 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.
The other systemsNothing moves when the object does
Slide a box 3.2 m across the world and its parallel drawing is the same drawing translated 131.5 px — every edge the same length to 4e-14 px. The perspective drawing of the same move changes its edge lengths by 87.2%. One family's pictures depend on where a thing is; the other's do not, and almost everything the two families disagree about follows from that.
Light and mirrorsThe lamp is the second eye
One photograph, one lamp whose position is known, and a point's place in space comes back to 9e-16 m — the camera's ray through the point, the lamp's ray through the image of its shadow, and the intersection of two lines. It is triangulation with one of the two eyes replaced by a light, and it degrades exactly like a stereo pair: 5.9 mm of depth per pixel at 39° between the rays, 1 mm at 15.4°.
Mirrors that are not camerasTwo 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.
The rectangle behind the lensA turning frame can be straightened; a travelling one cannot
Read a frame row by row while the camera turns at a radian a second and every point is 21 px from where a global shutter would put it, at every depth alike. Turn each row's rays back and every point returns to six trillionths of a pixel, with no depth known. Travel at 3 m/s instead, and the best correction that needs no depth is exact at one distance and 21 px wrong at 2 m.
What a machine computesAlong a line of constant depth the page is affine
Stepping a texture by a constant amount per pixel is wrong across a receding floor and exactly right along any line of it that stays at one depth — and on every plane those lines run parallel to its own vanishing line. Turn a 120 px span 1° away from that direction and it is 0.79 px out; roll the camera a hundredth of a degree and a floor drawn to 30 m is out by 0.69 px on its worst scanline.
The real instrumentA 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 over seventy-five degrees it follows every one of them three to five times more closely, and below sixty the polynomial is still the better model.
What each system gave upThe exclusion is two conditions, not ten rows
Ten systems have been measured and none has both a centre and a true measure. Ten is not a proof. Swept across the whole two-slit family — eighty-one members, both parameters run out to infinity — a centre appears at exactly the eight members whose slits sit at one finite distance, a measure at exactly the seventeen with a slit at infinity, and at none of them both. The case the two conditions appear to leave open is closed by the rays themselves: one divide is a slit, and eight page points use 6.02 m of it.
The eye that movesThe stations are also a staircase
A level eye draws a ground point on a row that depends on the eye's height and the ground's only through their difference. So a landscape drawn from three stations at 1.6, 4 and 11 m over flat ground is, to 6 × 10⁻¹⁴ px across ninety-nine samples, the same picture as one eye at 11 m over ground stepped 9.4 m and 7.0 m above the far plain. The station heights a reader recovers are recovered on an assumption the marks neither supply nor test — and what would decide between the two readings is a cliff 103% of a band's own height, which is exactly where the convention lays its mist.
What survivesOne 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.
Light and mirrorsA 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.