Advertisement

A Framework for Pencil-of-Points Structure-from-Motion

  • Adrien Bartoli
  • Mathieu Coquerelle
  • Peter Sturm
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3022)

Abstract

Our goal is to match contour lines between images and to recover structure and motion from those. The main difficulty is that pairs of lines from two images do not induce direct geometric constraint on camera motion. Previous work uses geometric attributes | orientation, length, etc. | for single or groups of lines. Our approach is based on using Pencil-of-Points (points on line) or pops for short. There are many advantages to using pops for structure-from-motion. The most important one is that, contrarily to pairs of lines, pairs of pops may constrain camera motion. We give a complete theoretical and practical framework for automatic structure-from-motion using pops | detection, matching, robust motion estimation, triangulation and bundle adjustment. For wide baseline matching, it has been shown that cross-correlation scores computed on neighbouring patches to the lines gives reliable results, given 2D homographic transformations to compensate for the pose of the patches. When cameras are known, this transformation has a 1-dimensional ambiguity. We show that when cameras are unknown, using pops lead to a 3-dimensional ambiguity, from which it is still possible to reliably compute cross-correlation. We propose linear and non-linear algorithms for estimating the fundamental matrix and for the multiple-view triangulation of pops. Experimental results are provided for simulated and real data.

Keywords

Interest Point Camera Motion Fundamental Matrix Supporting Point Local Geometry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Bignone, F., Henricsson, O., Fua, P., Stricker, M.: Automatic extraction of generic house roofs from high resolution aerial imagery. In: Buxton, B.F., Cipolla, R. (eds.) ECCV 1996. LNCS, vol. 1065, pp. 85–96. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Canny, J.: A computational approach to edge detection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 8(6), 679–698 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fischler, M.A., Bolles, R.C.: Random sample consensus: A paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Graphics and Image Processing 24(6), 381–395 (1981)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hartley, R., Sturm, P.: Triangulation. Computer Vision and Image Understanding 68(2), 146–157 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hartley, R.I.: Lines and points in three views and the trifocal tensor. International Journal of Computer Vision 22(2), 125–140 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hartley, R.I., Zisserman, A.: Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (June 2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Longuet-Higgins, H.C.: A computer program for reconstructing a scene from two projections. Nature 293, 133–135 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Médioni, G., Nevatia, R.: Segment-based stereo matching. Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing 31, 2–18 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mikolajczyk, K., Schmid, C.: An affine invariant interest point detector. In: Heyden, A., Sparr, G., Nielsen, M., Johansen, P. (eds.) ECCV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2350, pp. 128–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schmid, C., Zisserman, A.: Automatic line matching across views. In: CVPR, pp. 666–671 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Triggs, B.: Linear projective reconstruction from matching tensors. Image and Vision Computing 15(8), 617–625 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang, Z.: Determining the epipolar geometry and its uncertainty: A review. International Journal of Computer Vision 27(2), 161–195 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrien Bartoli
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mathieu Coquerelle
    • 2
  • Peter Sturm
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Engineering ScienceUniversity of OxfordUK
  2. 2.équipe MOVI, INRIA Rhône-AlpesFrance

Personalised recommendations