Underwater Light Field Camera Calibration Based on Multi-Layer Flat Refractive Model and Multi-Projection-Center Model

Xiaoqiang Zhang; Liangtao Zhong; Qiqi Leng; Lingyan Ran; Hongyu Chu

doi:10.3788/AOS202242.1215001

Acta Optica Sinica, Volume. 42, Issue 12, 1215001(2022)

Underwater Light Field Camera Calibration Based on Multi-Layer Flat Refractive Model and Multi-Projection-Center Model

Xiaoqiang Zhang^1、*, Liangtao Zhong¹, Qiqi Leng¹, Lingyan Ran², and Hongyu Chu¹

Author Affiliations

¹School of Information Engineering, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang 621000, Sichuan, China

²School of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi′an 710129, Shaanxi, China

show less

Abstract Get PDF(in Chinese)

Figures & Tables(6)

Fig. 1. Model diagram of ray paths inside camera and those of scene in underwater light field camera calibration

Download full size

Fig. 2. Real scene experimental data acquisition and ground truth value acquisition. (a) Real scene calibration data acquisition; (b) ground truth values of n and d₀ obtained by Zhang’s method

Download full size

Table 1. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different intermediate medium thickness conditions

View table

Table 1. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different intermediate medium thickness conditions

d₁ (in unitlength)	Measurementnoise /pixel	$e_{d_{0}}$ /%	e_n /(°)	e_repj /pixel
	0.3	6.21	1.9356	0.2997
0.05	0.5	10.71	3.1016	0.4992
	0.7	14.07	3.3863	0.6983
	0.3	6.90	2.2325	0.2996
0.10	0.5	9.67	2.3990	0.4991
	0.7	12.70	2.9575	0.6986
	0.3	5.02	1.4150	0.2996
0.15	0.5	11.60	2.6692	0.4998
	0.7	17.23	3.9720	0.6995

Table 2. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12] under different number of sub-apertures
View table
Table 2. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12] under different number of sub-apertures
Calibrationmethod Number ofsub-apertures $e_{d_{0}}$ /% e_n /(°) e_repj /pixel
Proposed 3×3 14.43 3.8114 0.4987
Proposed 5×5 9.67 2.3990 0.4991
Proposed 7×7 7.28 2.2280 0.4990
Method inRef. [12] 1 50.12 10.7565 0.5381

Table 3. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different poses

View table

Table 3. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different poses

PoseNo.	groundtruth of n	calibrated n	e_n /(°)	groundtruthof d₀ /m	calibratedd₀ /m	$e_{d_{0}}$ /%	e_repj /pixel
1	${[\begin{array}{l} 0.3108 & - 0.0138 & - 1.0000 \end{array}]}^{T}$	${[\begin{array}{l} 0.3221 & - 0.0236 & - 1.0000 \end{array}]}^{T}$	0.7936	0.3301	0.3316	0.45	0.3639
2	${[\begin{array}{l} - 0.3419 & - 0.0366 & - 1.0000 \end{array}]}^{T}$	${[\begin{array}{l} - 0.3450 & - 0.0286 & - 1.0000 \end{array}]}^{T}$	0.4905	0.3429	0.3523	2.73	0.3483
3	${[\begin{array}{l} 0.0513 & - 0.0182 & - 1.0000 \end{array}]}^{T}$	${[\begin{array}{l} 0.0550 & - 0.0221 & - 1.0000 \end{array}]}^{T}$	0.3046	0.3606	0.3645	1.10	0.3491

Table 4. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12]
View table
Table 4. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12]
Pose No. Calibration method $e_{d_{0}}$ /% e_n /(°)
1 Method in Ref. [12] 2.16 0.8104
Proposed 0.45 0.7936
2 Method in Ref. [12] 2.53 1.2174
Proposed 2.73 0.4905
3 Method in Ref. [12] 1.05 0.6617
Proposed 1.10 0.3046

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Xiaoqiang Zhang, Liangtao Zhong, Qiqi Leng, Lingyan Ran, Hongyu Chu. Underwater Light Field Camera Calibration Based on Multi-Layer Flat Refractive Model and Multi-Projection-Center Model[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2022, 42(12): 1215001

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites

Paper Information

Category: Machine Vision

Received: Nov. 15, 2021

Accepted: Dec. 27, 2021

Published Online: Jun. 7, 2022

The Author Email: Zhang Xiaoqiang (xqzhang@swust.edu.cn)

DOI:10.3788/AOS202242.1215001

Topics

laser devices and laser physics

Lasers and Laser Optics

Laser physics

laser manufacturing

Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology

Table 1. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different intermediate medium thickness conditions

Table 1. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different intermediate medium thickness conditions

Table 2. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12] under different number of sub-apertures

Table 2. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12] under different number of sub-apertures

Table 3. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different poses

Table 3. Quantitative analysis of calibration accuracy under different poses

Table 4. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12]

Table 4. Quantitative comparison of calibration accuracy between proposed method and method in Ref. [12]