2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2007
DOI: 10.1109/cvpr.2007.383348
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of PMD-Cameras and Stereo-Vision for the Task of Surface Reconstruction using Patchlets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
0
3

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
43
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Their analysis shows that range data adds robustness to the model, simplifies some preprocessing steps, and in general the generated models capture better the nature of the object. Stereo and ToF have also been compared by Beder et al [40] in the framework of surface patchlet identification and pose estimation. In their setup, using a highly textured surface for stereo experiments, ToF slightly outperforms stereo in terms of depth and normal direction to the patchlet.…”
Section: Object-related Tasksmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Their analysis shows that range data adds robustness to the model, simplifies some preprocessing steps, and in general the generated models capture better the nature of the object. Stereo and ToF have also been compared by Beder et al [40] in the framework of surface patchlet identification and pose estimation. In their setup, using a highly textured surface for stereo experiments, ToF slightly outperforms stereo in terms of depth and normal direction to the patchlet.…”
Section: Object-related Tasksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A classical solution in the area of object modeling is the use of calibrated stereo rigs. Therefore, initial works were devoted to their comparison with [37] Dynamic object detection and classification Color and light independence PMD Hussmann and Liepert [38] Object pose Easy object/background segmentation PMD Guomundsson et al [39] Known object pose estimation Light independent / Absolute scale SR3 Beder et al [40] Surface reconstruction using patchlets ToF easily combines with stereo PMD Fuchs and May [7] Precise surface reconstruction 3D at high rate SR3/O3D100 (Depth) Dellen et al [5] 3D object reconstruction 3D at high rate SR3 (Depth) Foix et al [6] Kuehnle et al [8] Object recognition for grasping 3D allow geometric primitives search SR3 Grundmann et al [41] Collision free object manipulation 3D at high rate SR3 + stereo Reiser and Kubacki [42] Position based visual servoing 3D is simply obtained / No model needed SR3 (Depth) Gachter et al [43] Object part detection for classification 3D at high rate SR3 Shin et al [44] SR2 Klank et al [45] Mobile manipulation Easy table/object segmentation SR4 Marton et al [46] Object categorization ToF easily combines with stereo SR4 + color Nakamura et al [47] Mobile manipulation Easy table segmentation SR4 + color Saxena et al [9] Grasping unknown objects 3D at high rate SR3 + stereo Zhu et al [48] Short range depth maps ToF easily combines with stereo SR3 + stereo Lindner et al [49] Object segmentation for recognition Easy color registration PMD + color camera Fischer et al [50] Occlusion handling in virtual objects 3D at high rate PMD + color camera…”
Section: Object-related Tasksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sensor fusion. The different reconstruction methods reviewed here provide different, often complementary advantages, as already shown by Groch et al (Groch et al, 2011) for laparoscopic interventions as well as by Beder et al (Beder et al, 2007) and Ringbeck (Ringbeck, 2009) in the non-medical context. For example, stereo approaches perform best on textured objects, while structured light and ToF yield the best results on homogeneous objects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Due to the above-mentioned systematic distance errors, ToF camera calibration not only requires a standard lateral calibration to determine the intrinsic camera parameters (Beder et al, 2007;Lindner et al, 2010), but also an additional calibration procedure to compensate for depth errors. Further challenges to be addressed include so-called flying pixels (i.e.…”
Section: State-of-the-artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, TOF camera estimates the distance from the real object to the eye with the help of time-of-flight principle, that measures the time a signal travels, with well defined speed spends, from the transmitter to the receiver (Beder, et al, 2007). The chosen PMD CamCube 3.0 utilizes Radio Frequency (RF) modulated light sources with phase detectors.…”
Section: Fig1: Two Stages Renderingmentioning
confidence: 99%