I have a small cube with n (you can assume that n = 4) distinguished points on its surface. These points are numbered (1-n) and form a coordinate space, where point #1 is the origin.
Now I'm using a tracking camera to get the coordinates of those points, relative to the camera's coordinate space. That means that I now have n vectors p_i pointing from the origin of the camera to the cube's surface.
With that information, I'm trying to compute the affine transformation matrix (rotation + translation) that represents the transformation between those two coordinate spaces. The translation part is fairly trivial, but I'm struggling with the computation of the rotation matrix.
Is there any build-in functionality in OpenCV that might help me solve this problem?
Sounds like cvGetPerspectiveTransform is what you're looking for; cvFindHomograpy might also be helpful.
solvePnP should give you the rotation matrix and the translation vector. Try it with CV_EPNP or CV_ITERATIVE.
Edit: Or perhaps you're looking for RQ decomposition.
Look at the Stereo Camera tutorial for OpenCV. OpenCV uses a planar chessboard for all the computation and sets its Z-dimension to 0 to build its list of 3D points. You already have 3D points so change the code in the tutorial to reflect your list of 3D points. Then you can compute the transformation.
Related
I'm coding a calibration algorithm for my depth-camera. This camera outputs an one channel 2D image with the distance of every object in the image.
From that image, and using the camera and distortion matrices, I was able to create a 3D point cloud, from the camera perspective. Now I wish to convert those 3D coordinates to a global/world coordinates. But, since I can't use any patterns like the chessboard to calibrate the camera, I need another alternative.
So I was thinking: If I provide some ground points (in the camera perspective), I would define a plane that I know should have the Z coordinate close to zero, in the global perspective. So, how should I proceed to find the transformation matrix that horizontalizes the plane.
Local coordinates ground plane, with an object on top
I tried using the OpenCV's solvePnP, but it didn't gave me the correct transformation. Also I thought in using the OpenCV's estimateAffine3D, but I don't know where should the global coordinates be mapped to, since the provided ground points do not need to lay on any specific pattern/shape.
Thanks in advance
What you need is what's commonly called extrinsic calibration: a rigid transformation relating the 3D camera reference frame to the 'world' reference frame. Usually, this is done by finding known 3D points in the world reference frame and their corresponding 2D projections in the image. This is what SolvePNP does.
To find the best rotation/translation between two sets of 3D points, in the sense of minimizing the root mean square error, the solution is:
Theory: https://igl.ethz.ch/projects/ARAP/svd_rot.pdf
Easier explanation: http://nghiaho.com/?page_id=671
Python code (from the easier explanation site): http://nghiaho.com/uploads/code/rigid_transform_3D.py_
So, if you want to transform 3D points from the camera reference frame, do the following:
As you proposed, define some 3D points with known position in the world reference frame, for example (but not necessarily) with Z=0. Put the coordinates in a Nx3 matrix P.
Get the corresponding 3D points in the camera reference frame. Put them in a Nx3 matrix Q.
From the file defined in point 3 above, call rigid_transform_3D(P, Q). This will return a 3x3 matrix R and a 3x1 vector t.
Then, for any 3D point in the world reference frame p, as a 3x1 vector, you can obtain the corresponding camera point, q with:
q = R.dot(p)+t
EDIT: answer when 3D position of points in world are unspecified
Indeed, for this procedure to work, you need to know (or better, to specify) the 3D coordinates of the points in your world reference frame. As stated in your comment, you only know the points are in a plane but don't have their coordinates in that plane.
Here is a possible solution:
Take the selected 3D points in camera reference frame, let's call them q'i.
Fit a plane to these points, for example as described in https://www.ilikebigbits.com/2015_03_04_plane_from_points.html. The result of this will be a normal vector n. To fully specify the plane, you need also to choose a point, for example the centroid (average) of q'i.
As the points surely don't perfectly lie in the plane, project them onto the plane, for example as described in: How to project a point onto a plane in 3D?. Let's call these projected points qi.
At this point you have a set of 3D points, qi, that lie on a perfect plane, which should correspond closely to the ground plane (z=0 in world coordinate frame). The coordinates are in the camera reference frame, though.
Now we need to specify an origin and the direction of the x and y axes in this ground plane. You don't seem to have any criteria for this, so an option is to arbitrarily set the origin just "below" the camera center, and align the X axis with the camera optical axis. For this:
Project the point (0,0,0) into the plane, as you did in step 4. Call this o. Project the point (0,0,1) into the plane and call it a. Compute the vector a-o, normalize it and call it i.
o is the origin of the world reference frame, and i is the X axis of the world reference frame, in camera coordinates. Call j=nxi ( cross product). j is the Y-axis and we are almost finished.
Now, obtain the X-Y coordinates of the points qi in the world reference frame, by projecting them on i and j. That is, do the dot product between each qi and i to get the X values and the dot product between each qi and j to get the Y values. The Z values are all 0. Call these X, Y, 0 coordinates pi.
Use these values of pi and qi to estimate R and t, as in the first part of the answer!
Maybe there is a simpler solution. Also, I haven't tested this, but I think it should work. Hope this helps.
Given a set of 4x4 pose matrices, one can derive the camera's euclidean coordinate system location as the following:
where R is the 3x3 rotation matrix and t is the translation vector of the pose, as per this question.
When the set of poses is treated in a sequential manner, such as when each refers to a camera's pose at some time step, the rotation and translation components can be accumulated as follows:
and
Where both can be plugged in to the first equation to yield the camera's relative position at a given time step.
My question is how to plot such points using OpenCV or a similar tool. For a camera moving around an object in a circular motion, the output plot should be circular, with the origin at the starting point of the trajectory.
An example is shown below:-
Though my question is not explicitly about plotting the axes as shown above, it would be a bonus.
TL;DR: Given a set of poses, how can we generate a plot like the one above with common tools such as OpenCV, VTK, Matplotlib, MATLAB etc.
obtain axises vectors X,Y,Z and position O for each plot point
simply extract them form matrix. See Understanding 4x4 homogenous transform matrices. Now I do not know if your matrices are already inverse or not. So if your matrices represent camera coordinate system (not inverted) extract needed info directly. If not first invert the matrix and then extract.
If you got homogenuous transform matrix then you can do pseudo inverse by exploiting transpose operation. For more info see full pseudo inverse matrix.
Render each plot point
so first plot the axises as lines:
red_line(O,O+a*X);
green_line(O,O+a*Y);
blue_line(O,O+a*Z);
where a is axis lines size. And after this plot a dot for the position
black_circle(O,r);
Where r is some radius. You can use any gfx lib/engine for the plot. I would go for GDI or OpenGL but that depends solely on what are you familiar with.
BTW. to improve avarenes of the time line you can modulate the colors intensity (start with dark and end with bright colors so you see where the motion starts and ends ...)
Localization of an object specified in the image.
I am working on the project of computer vision to find the distance of an object using stereo images.I followed the following steps using OpenCV to achieve my objective
1. Calibration of camera
2. Surf matching to find fundamental matrix
3. Rotation and Translation vector using svd as method is described in Zisserman and Hartley book.
4. StereoRectify to get the projection matrix P1, P2 and Rotation matrices R1, R2. The Rotation matrices can also be find using Homography R=CameraMatrix.inv() H Camera Matrix.
Problems:
i triangulated point using least square triangulation method to find the real distance to the object. it returns value in the form of [ 0.79856 , .354541 .258] . How will i map it to real world coordinates to find the distance to an object.
http://www.morethantechnical.com/2012/01/04/simple-triangulation-with-opencv-from-harley-zisserman-w-code/
Alternative approach:
Find the disparity between the object in two images and find the depth using the given formula
Depth= ( focal length * baseline ) / disparity
for disparity we have to perform the rectification first and the points must be undistorted. My rectification images are black.
Please help me out.It is important
Here is the detail explanation of how i implemented the code.
Calibration of Camera using Circles grid to get the camera matrix and Distortion coefficient. The code is given on the Github (Andriod).
2.Take two pictures of a car. First from Left and other from Right. Take the sub-image and calculate the -fundmental matrix- essential matrix- Rotation matrix- Translation Matrix....
3.I have tried to projection in two ways.
Take the first image projection as identity matrix and make a second project 3x4d through rotation and translation matrix and perform Triangulation.
Get the Projection matrix P1 and P2 from Stereo Rectify to perform Triangulation.
My object is 65 meters away from the camera and i dont know how to calculate this true this based on the result of triangulation in the form of [ 0.79856 , .354541 .258]
Question: Do i have to do some extra calibration to get the result. My code is not based to know the detail of geometric size of the object.
So you already computed the triangulation? Well, then you have points in camera coordinates, i.e. in the coordinate frame centered on one of the cameras (the left or right one depending on how your code is written and the order in which you feed your images to it).
What more do you want? The vector length (square root of the sum of the square coordinates) of those points is their estimated distance from the same camera. If you want their position in some other "world" coordinate system, you need to give the coordinate transform between that system and the camera - presumably through a calibration procedure.
I know that in the general case, making this conversion is impossible since depth information is lost going from 3d to 2d.
However, I have a fixed camera and I know its camera matrix. I also have a planar calibration pattern of known dimensions - let's say that in world coordinates it has corners (0,0,0) (2,0,0) (2,1,0) (0,1,0). Using opencv I can estimate the pattern's pose, giving the translation and rotation matrices needed to project a point on the object to a pixel in the image.
Now: this 3d to image projection is easy, but how about the other way? If I pick a pixel in the image that I know is part of the calibration pattern, how can I get the corresponding 3d point?
I could iteratively choose some random 3d point on the calibration pattern, project to 2d, and refine the 3d point based on the error. But this seems pretty horrible.
Given that this unknown point has world coordinates something like (x,y,0) -- since it must lie on the z=0 plane -- it seems like there should be some transformation that I can apply, instead of doing the iterative nonsense. My maths isn't very good though - can someone work out this transformation and explain how you derive it?
Here is a closed form solution that I hope can help someone. Using the conventions in the image from your comment above, you can use centered-normalized pixel coordinates (usually after distortion correction) u and v, and extrinsic calibration data, like this:
|Tx| |r11 r21 r31| |-t1|
|Ty| = |r12 r22 r32|.|-t2|
|Tz| |r13 r23 r33| |-t3|
|dx| |r11 r21 r31| |u|
|dy| = |r12 r22 r32|.|v|
|dz| |r13 r23 r33| |1|
With these intermediate values, the coordinates you want are:
X = (-Tz/dz)*dx + Tx
Y = (-Tz/dz)*dy + Ty
Explanation:
The vector [t1, t2, t3]t is the position of the origin of the world coordinate system (the (0,0) of your calibration pattern) with respect to the camera optical center; by reversing signs and inversing the rotation transformation we obtain vector T = [Tx, Ty, Tz]t, which is the position of the camera center in the world reference frame.
Similarly, [u, v, 1]t is the vector in which lies the observed point in the camera reference frame (starting from camera center). By inversing the rotation transformation we obtain vector d = [dx, dy, dz]t, which represents the same direction in world reference frame.
To inverse the rotation transformation we take advantage of the fact that the inverse of a rotation matrix is its transpose (link).
Now we have a line with direction vector d starting from point T, the intersection of this line with plane Z=0 is given by the second set of equations. Note that it would be similarly easy to find the intersection with the X=0 or Y=0 planes or with any plane parallel to them.
Yes, you can. If you have a transformation matrix that maps a point in the 3d world to the image plane, you can just use the inverse of this transformation matrix to map a image plane point to the 3d world point. If you already know that z = 0 for the 3d world point, this will result in one solution for the point. There will be no need to iteratively choose some random 3d point. I had a similar problem where I had a camera mounted on a vehicle with a known position and camera calibration matrix. I needed to know the real world location of a lane marking captured on the image place of the camera.
If you have Z=0 for you points in world coordinates (which should be true for planar calibration pattern), instead of inversing rotation transformation, you can calculate homography for your image from camera and calibration pattern.
When you have homography you can select point on image and then get its location in world coordinates using inverse homography.
This is true as long as the point in world coordinates is on the same plane as the points used for calculating this homography (in this case Z=0)
This approach to this problem was also discussed below this question on SO: Transforming 2D image coordinates to 3D world coordinates with z = 0
I am doing stereo calibration of two cameras (let's name them L and R) with opencv. I use 20 pairs of checkerboard images and compute the transformation of R with respect to L. What I want to do is use a new pair of images, compute the 2d checkerboard corners in image L, transform those points according to my calibration and draw the corresponding transformed points on image R with the hope that they will match the corners of the checkerboard in that image.
I tried the naive way of transforming the 2d points from [x,y] to [x,y,1], multiply by the 3x3 rotation matrix, add the rotation vector and then divide by z, but the result is wrong, so I guess it's not that simple (?)
Edit (to clarify some things):
The reason I want to do this is basically because I want to validate the stereo calibration on a new pair of images. So, I don't actually want to get a new 2d transformation between the two images, I want to check if the 3d transformation I have found is correct.
This is my setup:
I have the rotation and translation relating the two cameras (E), but I don't have rotations and translations of the object in relation to each camera (E_R, E_L).
Ideally what I would like to do:
Choose the 2d corners in image from camera L (in pixels e.g. [100,200] etc).
Do some kind of transformation on the 2d points based on matrix E that I have found.
Get the corresponding 2d points in image from camera R, draw them, and hopefully they match the actual corners!
The more I think about it though, the more I am convinced that this is wrong/can't be done.
What I am probably trying now:
Using the intrinsic parameters of the cameras (let's say I_R and I_L), solve 2 least squares systems to find E_R and E_L
Choose 2d corners in image from camera L.
Project those corners to their corresponding 3d points (3d_points_L).
Do: 3d_points_R = (E_L).inverse * E * E_R * 3d_points_L
Get the 2d_points_R from 3d_points_R and draw them.
I will update when I have something new
It is actually easy to do that but what you're making several mistakes. Remember after stereo calibration R and L relate the position and orientation of the second camera to the first camera in the first camera's 3D coordinate system. And also remember to find the 3D position of a point by a pair of cameras you need to triangulate the position. By setting the z component to 1 you're making two mistakes. First, most likely you have used the common OpenCV stereo calibration code and have given the distance between the corners of the checker board in cm. Hence, z=1 means 1 cm away from the center of camera, that's super close to the camera. Second, by setting the same z for all the points you are saying the checker board is perpendicular to the principal axis (aka optical axis, or principal ray), while most likely in your image that's not the case. So you're transforming some virtual 3D points first to the second camera's coordinate system and then projecting them onto the image plane.
If you want to transform just planar points then you can find the homography between the two cameras (OpenCV has the function) and use that.