Camera Calibration from a Single Image based on Coupled Line Cameras and Rectangle Constraint

21st International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR 2012)
November 11-15, 2012. Tsukuba, Japan

Camera Calibration from a Single Image based on
Coupled Line Cameras and Rectangle Constraint

Joo-Haeng Lee
Robot and Cognitive Systems Research Dept., ETRI
joohaeng@etri.re.kr

Abstract Several approaches are based on geometric prop-
erties of a rectangle or a parallelogram. Wu et al.
Given a single image of a scene rectangle of an un- proposed a calibration method based on rectangles of
known aspect ratio and size, we present a method to known aspect ratio [4]. Li et al. designed a rectangle
reconstruct the projective structure and to find camera landmark to localize a mobile robot with an approxi-
parameters including focal length, position, and orien- mate rectangle constraint, which does not give an ana-
tation. First, we solve the special case when the center lytic solution [5]. Kim and Kweon propose a method to
of a scene rectangle is projected to the image center. We estimate intrinsic camera parameters from two or more
formulate this problem with coupled line cameras and rectangle of unknown aspect ratio [6]. A parallelogram
present the analytic solution for it. Then, by prefixing constraint can be used for calibration, which generally
a simple preprocessing step, we solve the general case requires more than two scene parallelograms projected
without the centering constraint. We also provides a in multiple-view images as in [7, 8, 9].
determinant to tell if an image quadrilateral is a pro- Our contribution can be summarized as follows.
jection of a rectangle. We demonstrate the performance Based on a geometric configuration of coupled line
of the proposed method with synthetic and real data. cameras, which models a simple camera of an unknown
focal length, we give an analytic solution to reconstruct
a complete projective structure from a single image of
1. Introduction an unknown rectangle in the scene: no prior knowledge
is required on the aspect ratio and correspondences.
Camera calibration is one of the most classical topics Then, the reconstruction result can be utilized in finding
in computer vision research. We have an extensive list the internal and external parameters of a camera: focal
of related works providing mature solutions. In this pa- length, rotation and translation. The proposed solution
per, we are interested in a special problem to calibrate a also provides a simple determinant to tell if an image
camera from a single image of an unknown scene rect- quadrilateral is a projection of a scene rectangle.
angle. We do not assume any prior knowledge on cor- In a general framework for plane-based camera cal-
respondences between scene and image points. Due to ibration, camera parameters can be found first using
the limited information, a simple camera model is used: the image of the absolute conic (IAC) and its relation
the focal length is the only unknown internal parameter. with projective features such as vanishing points [2, 10].
The problem in this paper has a different nature with Then, a scene geometry can be reconstructed using a
classical computer vision problems. In the PnP prob- non-linear optimization on geometric constrains such
lem, we find transformation matrix between the scene orthogonality, which cannot be formulated as a closed-
and the camera frames with prior knowledge on the form in general.
correspondences between the scene and image points
as well as the internal camera parameters [1]. In cam- 2. Problem Formulation
era resection, we find the projection matrix from known
correspondences between the scene and image points 2.1. Line Camera
without prior knowledge of camera parameters [2].
Camera self-calibration does not rely on a known Eu- A line camera is a conceptual camera, which follows
clidean structure, but requires multiple images from the same projection model of a standard pin-hole cam-
camera motion [3]. era. (See Fig 1a.) Let v0 v2 be a line segment in the

978-4-9906441-1-6 ©2012 IAPR 758

pc

Ψ2 Ψ
0
l2
l0
s2 d s0
Θ0
v2 m v0 v m v0 c
2

(a) Line camera (b) Trajectory of the center of projection (a) Pin-hole Camera (b) Line Camera C0 (c) Line Camera C1

Figure 1: A configuration of a line camera Figure 2: A pin-hole camera and its decomposition into
coupled line cameras.

scene, which will be projected as a line u0 u2 in the line
camera C0 . Especially, we are interested in the posi- rectangle G in a pin-hole camera with the center of pro-
tion pc and the orientation θ0 of C0 when the principal jection at pc . Note that the principal axis passes through
axis passes through the center vm of v0 v2 and the center vm , um and pc .
um = (0, 0, 1) of image line. Using this configuration of coupled line cameras, we
To simplify the formulation, we assume a canon- find the orientation θi of each line camera Ci and the
ical configuration where vm vi = 1, and vm is length d of the common principal axis from a given
placed at the origin of the world coordinate system: quadrilateral H. Using the lengths of partial diagonals,
vm = (0, 0, 0). For derivation, we define followings: li = um ui , we can find the relation between the cou-
d = pc vm , li = um ui , ψi = ∠vm pc vi , and pled cameras Ci from (1):
s i = pc v i .
tan ψ1 l1 sin θ1 (d − cos θ0 )
In this configuration, we can derive the following re- = = (3)
lation: tan ψ0 l0 sin θ0 (d − cos θ1 )
l2 d − cos θ0 d0 Manipulation of (2) and (3) leads to the system of non-
= = (1)
l0 d + cos θ0 d1 linear equations:
where d0 = d − cos θ0 = s0 cos ψ0 and d1 = d + β sin θ0 cos θ1 − cos θ0 sin θ1 cos θ0 cos θ1
cos θ0 = s2 cos ψ2 . We can derive the relation between d= = =
β sin θ0 − sin θ1 α0 α1
θ0 and d from (1): (4)
where β = l1 /l0 . Using (4), the orientation θ0 can be
cos θ0 = d (l0 − l2 )/(l0 + l2 ) = d α0 (2)
represented with coefficients, α0 , α1 , and β, that are
where αi = (li − li+2 )/(li + li+2 ), which is solely solely derived from a quadrilateral H:
derived from a image line ui ui+2 . Note that θ0 and d √
are sufficient parameters to determine the exact position θ0 A0 + A1 ± 2 A0 A1
tan = = D± (5)
of pc in 2D. When α0 is fixed, pc is defined on a certain 2 A 1 − A0
sphere as in Fig 1b. Once θi and d are known, additional where
parameters can be also determined: tan ψi = sin θi /d
and si = sin θi / sin ψi . A0 = B0 + 2B1 , A1 = B0 − 2B1
2 2
B0 = 2(α0 − 1) (α0 + α1 ) − 4α0 (α1 − 1)2 β 2
2 2

2.2. Coupled Line Cameras
B1 = (α0 − 1)2 (α0 − α1 )(α0 + α1 )
A standard pin-hole camera can be represented with The actual value of θ0 should be chosen to make d > 0
two line cameras coupled by sharing the center of pro- using (2). With known θ0 , we can compute values of
jection. (See Fig 2.) Let a scene rectangle G have θ1 and d using (4). Based on the result of this section,
two diagonals v0 v2 and v1 v3 , each of which follows the explicit coordinates of pc and the shape of G are
the canonical configuration in Section 2.1: vm vi = 1 reconstructed in Section 3.1.
where vm = (0, 0, 0). Each diagonal vi vi+2 is pro-
jected to an image line ui ui+2 in a line camera Ci . 2.3. Rectangle Determination
When two line cameras Ci share the center of projec-
tion pc , two image lines ui ui+2 intersect at um on the In our configuration of coupled line cameras, the ex-
common principal axis, say pc vm . The four vertices ui istence of θi implies that H is the projection of a canon-
form a quadrilateral H, which is the projection of the ical rectangle G. As the orientation angle θ0 should be

759

a positive real number, the expression inside the outer w1 w0
square root of (5) also should be a positive real number:
√
A0 + A1 ± 2 A0 A1
D± = >0 (6)
A1 − A0 u3
g
u3 Qg
u2
The above condition guarantees that a quadrilateral H g
u0 u0
um Q
is the projection of a scene rectangle G, which will be u1

fully reconstructed in Section 3.1.
Figure 3: Finding a centered quad Q (in blue) from a
3. Reconstruction and Calibration off-centered quad Qg (in red) using vanishing points.

3.1. Reconstructing Projective Structure
and W denote a scalar, a camera and a transformation
We define a projective structure as a frustum with a matrices, respectively. Note that we assume a simple
rectangular base G and an apex in the center of projec- camera model K: the only unknown internal parameter
tion pc . (See Fig 2.) Since G has a canonical form and is a focal length f . Since the model plane is at z = 0, it
parameterized by φ, its vertices can be represented as is straightforward to derive K and W. See [2] for details.
v0 = (1, 0, 0), v1 = (cos φ, sin φ, 0), v2 = −v0 , and
v3 = −v1 where φ is the crossing angle of two diag- 3.3. Off-Centered Quadrilateral
onals. Since vi = 1, the crossing angle φ is repre-
sented as In a centered case above, the centers of a scene rect-
cos φ = v0 , v1 (7) angle G and an image quadrilateral Q are both aligned
Two diagonals of the quadrilateral H intersect at the at the principal axis, which is exceptional in reality. The
image center um on the principal axis with the crossing proposed method, however, can be readily applied to
angle ρ. the off-centered case by prefixing a simple preprocess-
To compute φ, we denote the center of projection as ing step.
pc = (0, 0, 0), the image center as uc = (0, 0, −1), Let Qg and Gg denote an off-centered image quadri-
c m
the first two vertices of H as uc = (tan ψ0 , 0, −1) lateral and a corresponding scene rectangle, respec-
0
and uc = (cos ρ tan ψ1 , sin ρ tan ψ1 , −1), the center tively. In the preprocessing step, we will find a cen-
1
c
of G as vm = (0, 0, −d), and the vertices of G as tered quadrilateral Q which will reconstruct the projec-
vi = si ui / uc . Since vi = vi − vm , φ can be com-
c c c c tive structure where the projective correspondences be-
i
puted using (7) with known values of ρ, d, si , and ψi . tween Qg and Gg are preserved. We can show that such
The coordinates of pc = (x, y, z) can be found by Q can be geometrically derived from Qg using the prop-
solving following equations: d cos θ0 = x, d cos θ1 = erties of parallel lines and vanishing points. (See Fig 3.)
x cos φ + y sin φ, and x2 + y 2 + z 2 = d2 , which are de- We choose one vertex ug of Qg as the initial vertex
i
rived from the projective structure. Now, the projective u0 of Q, say u0 = ug . First, we compute two vanishing
0
structure has been reconstructed as a frustum with the points wi from Qg : w0 as intersection of ug ug and ug ug
0 1 2 3
base G(φ) and the apex pc . and w1 as intersection of ug ug and ug ug . Let u2 be the
0 3 1 2
Note that the reconstructed G is guaranteed to be a opposite vertex of u0 on the diagonal passing through
rectangle satisfying geometric constraints such as or- u0 and um : u2 = a(um − u0 ) + u0 where a is an un-
thogonality since the proposed method is based on a known scalar defining u2 . Then, we can make symbolic
canonical configuration of coupled line camera of Sec- definitions of the other vertices of Q: u1 as intersection
tion 2. of two lines u0 w1 and u2 w0 , and u3 as intersection of
u0 w0 and u2 w1 .
3.2. Camera Calibration Note that the above definitions of ui guarantees that
each pair of opposite edges are parallel before projec-
Since our reconstruction method is formulated using tive distortion. The symbolic definitions of ui above
a canonical configuration of coupled line cameras, the can be combined in one constraint: the intersection of
derivation based on H can be substituted with a given u0 u2 and u1 u3 equals to the image center um , which
image quadrilateral Q. Now we can find a homography is formulated as a single equation of one unknown a.
H using four point correspondences between G(φ) and Since we can find the value of a, all the vertices ui of
Q. A homography is defined as H = sKW where s, K the centered image quadrilateral Q can be computed ac-

760

(a) Reference Gr and Qg (b) Centered quad. Q

Figure 6: Relative errors in reconstruction ( vi − vm
and φ) and calibration (pc and f ) when added noises
in a diameter of dmax pixels around each vertex of Qg .
Result is the average of 100 experiments for dmax .
(c) Reconstruction (d) Rectifcation

First, we find a centered quadrilateral Q using van-
Figure 4: Experiment with a synthetic rectangle Gr .
ishing points defined by Qg in Fig 4b. Then, the pro-
jective structure is reconstructed as a frustum with the
centered scene rectangle G and the center of projec-
tion pc in Fig 4c. Then, the homography H between
G and Q are derived, which is further decomposed to
projection K and transformation W matrices as in Sec-
(a) Reference Gr and Qg (b) Centered quad. Q tion 3.2. Using the homography H and the given off-
centered quadrilateral Qg , we can reconstruct the target
scene rectangle Gg (φg ) in Fig 4d.
In this example, the overall error can be measured
between Gr and Gg , which is found to be negligible:
g g
eφ = φg − φr < 10−14 and ||vi vi+2 − vi vi+2 || <
r r
(c) Reconstruction (d) Rectifcation −13
10 . (Note that these error metrics are sufficient since
the geometric constraint such as orthogonality is always
satisfied as in Section 3.1.) Then, the focal length can
Figure 5: Experiment for a near-infinite vanishing point.
be correctly reconstructed: f = 1280 in this example.
Our method handles an off-centered quadrilateral
cordingly. based on its vanishing points in the image plane, which
As a remark, we need to specially handle singular may be numerically unstable according to the paral-
cases where two vanishing points w0 and w1 are not de- lelism in geometry. In Fig 5a, Gr has been placed to
fined [10]. However, experimental results show that the generate a near-infinite vanishing points of Q in the
proposed method is numerically stable for near-singular image plane as in Fig 5b. To test robustness near a
cases. singular case, we added a small quantity of rotation,
say ∆φr = 10−n where n > 1, to the singular an-
gle. According to the experiment, the proposed method
4. Experiments is very stable even when the configuration approaches
the singular case. For example in Fig 5, when ∆φr =
We demonstrate the experimental results for both 10−10 , we encounter a near-infinite vanishing point at
synthetic and real data. For experiment, the proposed (1.56807 × 1013 , 1547.54). However, the error is al-
method was implemented in Mathematica, and a Log- most negligible: eφ < 10−5 .
itech C910 webcam was used for real data with auto- To test robustness, we added random noises to each
focus enabled and 1280 × 720 resolution. vertex of reference quadrilateral Qg in a diameter of
dmax pixels. (See Fig 6.) In a practical situation when
4.1. Synthetic Data dmax = 1, overall errors are less than 2%. Generally,
reconstruction errors are smaller than calibration errors.
We tested with a synthetic scene containing a ref-
erence rectangle Gr (with random values of crossing 4.2. Real Data
angle φr , size, position and orientation) and a corre-
sponding image quadrilateral Qg generated by a known We also tested with real images. In Fig 7a, the off-
camera in Fig 4a. centered quadrilateral Qg is the image of an ISO A4

761

Camera Calibration from a Single Image based on Coupled Line Cameras and Rectangle Constraint

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Camera Calibration from a Single Image based on Coupled Line Cameras and Rectangle Constraint (20)

More from Joo-Haeng Lee (11)

Recently uploaded (20)

Camera Calibration from a Single Image based on Coupled Line Cameras and Rectangle Constraint