2013 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing 2013
DOI: 10.1109/icip.2013.6738162
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Video stabilization by estimation of similarity transformation from integral projections

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Standard video stabilization methods use projective transformation [47], affine transformation [32] or similarity transformation [48], or combinations of them [49,50] as their 2D motion model. However, our initial tests with projective transformation did not give accurate results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Standard video stabilization methods use projective transformation [47], affine transformation [32] or similarity transformation [48], or combinations of them [49,50] as their 2D motion model. However, our initial tests with projective transformation did not give accurate results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A scene with a homogeneous background with small range of motion is depicted in Figure 1, while a scene obtained from an on-road shooting with forward moving platform is depicted in Figure 2. These figures show the results of video stabilization using three methods, such as Derivative Dynamic Time (DDT) warping based on angular integral projections (Veldandi et al, 2013), Fourier Radon (FRadon) warping (Mohamadabadi et al, 2012), and Differential-Radon (DRadon) curve warping (Shukla et al, 2017). As it can be seen, all methods produce the cropped frames that caused a necessity of video completion.…”
Section: Construction Of Pseudo-panoramic Key Framementioning
confidence: 99%