2010 3dtv-Conference: The True Vision - Capture, Transmission and Display of 3D Video 2010
DOI: 10.1109/3dtv.2010.5506605
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison between two 3D free-viewpoint generation methods: Player-billboard and 3D reconstruction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…According to subjective experiments in [24], the billboard model approach is more robust to noise than the other visual hull methods, but the main problem in the conventional billboard model method is where the contact point between the billboard and the ground in 3D space is. To be specific, the contact point is calculated using simple projection from the player coordinates in the 2D image to the 3D field, and in the methods [13], [14], the bottom line in the player boundary box is used as a reference for the player coordinates.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to subjective experiments in [24], the billboard model approach is more robust to noise than the other visual hull methods, but the main problem in the conventional billboard model method is where the contact point between the billboard and the ground in 3D space is. To be specific, the contact point is calculated using simple projection from the player coordinates in the 2D image to the 3D field, and in the methods [13], [14], the bottom line in the player boundary box is used as a reference for the player coordinates.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the number of multiple cameras increases, the 3D estimation accuracy is also improved as well as the quality of the generated free-viewpoint video. However, SfS estimation accuracy is easily damaged by the noise of the captured images [11].…”
Section: Ibmrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the same way, dolly-in video can also be generated. However, due to such influences as the calibration error of multi-view camera, synchronization shift, changes in lighting conditions, and appearance changes due to sunlight fluctuation, the generated 3D model often includes estimation error [11]. Therefore, [11] has a problem that the quality of the generated dolly-in video may deteriorate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the technologies to effectively present a multi-view video is bullet-time video [6,7], which realizes a visual effect of a viewport moving around the subject by sequentially switching/displaying the multi-view videos along with the layout of the shooting cameras. Unlike free-viewpoint video [8][9][10][11][12][13], generating bullet-time video does not require reconstruction of a 3D image of the target scene; thus, it is possible to generate and present a high-quality image with a low processing cost, which is an important issue for visual feedback. Therefore, we consider bullet-time video an appropriate approach for the viewport visual feedback in motor learning.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%