Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Calibrating and optimizing poses of visual sensors in distributed platforms

  • Regular paper
  • Published:
Multimedia Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many novel multimedia, home entertainment, visual surveillance and health applications use multiple audio-visual sensors. We present a novel approach for position and pose calibration of visual sensors, i.e., cameras, in a distributed network of general purpose computing devices (GPCs). It complements our work on position calibration of audio sensors and actuators in a distributed computing platform (Raykar et al. in proceedings of ACM Multimedia ‘03, pp. 572–581, 2003). The approach is suitable for a wide range of possible – even mobile – setups since (a) synchronization is not required, (b) it works automatically, (c) only weak restrictions are imposed on the positions of the cameras, and (d) no upper limit on the number of cameras under calibration is imposed. Corresponding points across different camera images are established automatically. Cameras do not have to share one common view. Only a reasonable overlap between camera subgroups is necessary. The method has been sucessfully tested in numerous multi-camera environments with a varying number of cameras and has proven itself to work extremely accurate. Once all distributed visual sensors are calibrated, we focus on post-optimizing their poses to increase coverage of the space observed. A linear programming approach is derived that determines jointly for each camera the pan and tilt angle that maximizes the coverage of the space at a given sampling frequency. Experimental results clearly demonstrate the gain in visual coverage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berkelaar, P.N.M., Eikland, K. lpsolve: Open souce (mixed- integer) linear programming system. Eindhoven U. of Technology. http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/lp_solve/ files/Version5.5/

  2. Bouguet, J.-Y. Camera Calibration Toolbox for Matlab. http://www.vision.caltech.edu/bouguet/calib_doc/

  3. Chakrabarty H.Q.K., Iyengar S.S., Cho E. (2002) Grid coverage for surveillance and target location in distributed sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Comput. 51(12): 1448–1453

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, X., Davis, J., Slusallek, P. Wide area camera calibration using virtual calibration objects. In: Proceedings of CVPR ’00, pp. 2520–2527 2000

  5. Erdem, U., Sclaroff, S. Optimal placement of cameras in floorplans to satisfy task requirements and cost constraints. In: OMNIVIS Workshop, 2004

  6. Fitzgibbon, A., Zissermann, A. Automatic camera recovery for closed or open image sequences. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 311–326 1998

  7. Forsyth, D.A., Ponce, J. Computer Vision: A Modern Approach. Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 2002

  8. Harris, C., Stephens, M. A combined corner and edge detector. In: Proceedings of the 4th Alvey Vision Conference, pp. 147–152, 1988

  9. Hartley, R. An algorithm for self-calibration from several views. In: Proceedings of CVPR ’94, pp. 908–912, Seattle, USA, 1994

  10. Hartley R., Zisserman A. (2003) Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision. Cambridge University. Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Heikkilä, J., Silven, O. A four-step camera calibration procedure with implicit image correction. In: Proceedings of CVPR ’97, pp. 1106–1112, 1997

  12. Hörster, E., Lienhart, R. Approximating optimal visual sensor placement. In: Proceedings of ICME ’06, 2006

  13. Intel corporation. OpenCV Computer Vision Library. http://www.intel.com/research/mrl/research/opencv/

  14. Lienhart, R., Kozintsev, I., Wehr, S., Yeung, M. On the importance of exact synchronization for distributed audio processing. In: Proceedings of ICASSP ’03, pp. 840–843, 2003

  15. Lowe D.G. (2004) Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vis 60(2): 91–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mikolajczyk, K., Schmid, C. A performance evaluation of local descriptors. In: Proceedings of CVPR ’03, vol. 2, pp. 257–263, 2003

  17. Mikolajczyk, K., Schmid, C. An affine invariant interest point detector. In: ECCV (1), pp. 128–142, 2002

  18. Mittal, A., Davis, L. Visibility analysis and sensor planning in dynamic environments, vol. I, pp. 175–189, 2004

  19. Pollefeys M. (1999) Self-Calibration and Metric 3D Reconstruction from Uncalibrated Image Sequences. PhD thesis, K. U. Leuven, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rahimi A., Dunagan B., Darrell T. (2004) Simultaneous calibration and tracking with a network of non-overlapping sensors. CVPR 01:187–194

    Google Scholar 

  21. Raykar, V., Kozintsev, I., Lienhart R. Position calibration of audio sensors and actuators in a distributed computing platform. In: Proceedings ACM Multimedia ’03, pp. 572–581, 2003

  22. Sahni S., Xu X. (2005) Algorithms for wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Distrib. Sensor Netw. 1(1): 35–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shi, J., Tomasi, C. Good features to track. In: Proceedings of CVPR ’94, pp. 593 – 600, 1994

  24. Sinha, S.N., Pollefeys, M. Calibrating a network of cameras from live or archived video. In: Proceedings of CVPR ’04, 2004

  25. Sturm, P., Triggs, W. A factorization based algorithm for multiple-image projective structure and motion. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 709–720, 1996

  26. Svoboda T., Martinec D., Pajdla T. (2005) A convenient multi-camera self-calibration for virtual environments. PRESENCE Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 14(4): 407–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tsai R. (1987) A versatile camera calibration technique for high-accuracy 3d machine vision metrology using off-the-shelf tv cameras and lense. IEEE J. Rob. Autom. RA-3, 323–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang J., Zhong N. (2006) Efficient point coverage in wireless sensor networks. J. Comb. Optim. 11(3): 291–304

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Williams H. (1985) Model Building in Mathematical Programming. 2nd edn, Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang, Z. A flexible new technique for camera calibration. Technical Report MSR-TR-98-71, Microsoft Research, Redmond, USA, 1998

  31. Zou Y., Chakrabarty K. (2004) Sensor deployment and target localization in distributed sensor networks. Trans. Embed Comput Syst. 3(1): 61–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Multimedia Computing Lab, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany

    Eva Hörster & Rainer Lienhart

Authors
  1. Eva Hörster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rainer Lienhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eva Hörster.

Additional information

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hörster, E., Lienhart, R. Calibrating and optimizing poses of visual sensors in distributed platforms. Multimedia Systems 12, 195–210 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00530-006-0057-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00530-006-0057-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation