Change font size
It is currently Tue Jun 30, 2026 7:02 am


Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 1   [ 6 posts ]
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:57 am 

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:48 am
Posts: 17
Hello

I have had no problems with calibrating 4 eye cameras, but with 6 eye cameras I cannot get an accurate setup it seems.

I've tried multiple times, and although all cameras are roughly the same height from ground , i get results like this picture:
http://s14.postimg.org/68daqwl81/problem.png

How can camera#6 just be located several meters above the others and still the dots are green? It must be a mathematically incorrect solution to the camera system matrix?

Compared with 4 cameras calibration its not possible to keep the light source visible in all cameras at the same time, is that really required?
I'm sure i can get a accurate camera setup by using 6 pictures from each camera using a program like pfTrack with the user track module (which uses simple photo grammetery as well).

The only problem i can think of is that the light source doesnt start from top and go down , but is that really required?

Thank you very much for helping me out with this!


Attachments:
problem.png
problem.png [ 154.33 KiB | Viewed 31104 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:38 am 

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 1:34 pm
Posts: 2423
Location: Los Angeles
That's really weird. Have you checked that the lens switch on the camera is the same as the others? You can dial the camera lens for wide or narrow FOV, and maybe the one flying high is set for narrow?

G.

_________________
Greenlaw
Artist/Partner - Little Green Dog | My Demo Reels (2013,) (2015,) (2017,) and (2019)
Image
Watch a one minute excerpt on Vimeo now!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:18 pm 
iPi Soft

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:12 am
Posts: 2355
Location: Moscow, Russia
The marker may not visible to all cameras at the same time. But it should be good visible to each individual camera most of the time (80% minimum). That will lead to a sufficient intersection of marker detections between various combinations of cameras.
The pattern of moving the marker is not important. Just ensure the visibility, good capture space coverage, and making several ground touches.

Check the FOV setting on cameras, as Greenlaw suggested.
What is the "marker misdetection" values for cameras? (They are shown at the "Scene" tab after the marker detection pass)
Do you position the cameras in proper order before running the calibration with auto detection of positions off?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:22 pm 

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:48 am
Posts: 17
Hi,

Thanks very much for the quick reply.

Within the next calibration video after i posted i was actually able to get a successful calibration. It looks very accurate finally, great!
My simple tip is that a longer video seem to work less good for 6 cameras, try to focus on having a short video with the light source visible in all cameras instead.
Probably like you said the movement shouldnt matter as long as you have sparsity enough and atleast 3 ground points (i had exactly 3 and its enough).

Unfortunately i get some bad results with the actor arms when tracking, they get double folded and penetrate the actor torso, probably the arm color is too close to the ground color so will try to put on a long sleeved shirt. Mistracking seem to happen when the arm is too close to the body. I'm also using a small virtual prop for the actor.

Btw, wouldnt it be great to add support for being able to change how wide the actor pants are (or simply thickness of legs), i was thinking of using tights when i record to make leg movements more pronounced?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:25 pm 

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:48 am
Posts: 17
Greenlaw, thanks.

Yes, they are all wide PS eye's, believe thats 75 degrees FoV.
The problem was probably just too much data, i made a much shorter video that also had the marker visible in close to all cameras all the time and that worked much better.
Not much difference in tracking quality from 4 to 6 cameras though :(

Still problems like arms double folded and penetrating the chest. Why doesnt Ipi studio have more constraints? Why does it need to support broken looking arms and body parts penetrating chest etc? Wouldnt tracking be much more solid if those type of solutions could be ruled out? For example why not have a settable angle span that each joint would be restricted to?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:34 am 
iPi Soft

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:12 am
Posts: 2355
Location: Moscow, Russia
nights wrote:
Btw, wouldnt it be great to add support for being able to change how wide the actor pants are (or simply thickness of legs), i was thinking of using tights when i record to make leg movements more pronounced?

We plan to add more customization to the actor's model in v3.

nights wrote:
Why does it need to support broken looking arms and body parts penetrating chest etc? Wouldnt tracking be much more solid if those type of solutions could be ruled out? For example why not have a settable angle span that each joint would be restricted to?

We already have internal constraints on individual joint rotations, closely related to anatomical limitations. Maybe we also make these configurable in v3.
There are many ways to improve tracking consistency that we plan to work on.

Many of the tracking errors can be easily cleaned up by tracking backwards, manual editing + refit pose.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 1   [ 6 posts ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 145 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
610nm Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net