Comparison of reconstruction approaches for plenoptic imaging systems

Abstract

Plenoptic cameras provide single-shot 3D imaging capabilities, based on the acquisition of the Light-Field, which corresponds to a spatial and directional sampling of all the rays of a scene reaching a detector. Specific algorithms applied on raw Light-Field data allow for the reconstruction of an object at different depths of the scene.Two different plenoptic imaging geometries have been reported, associated with two reconstruction algorithms: the traditional or unfocused plenoptic camera, also known as plenoptic camera 1.0, and the focused plenoptic camera, also called plenoptic camera 2.0. Both systems use the same optical elements, but placed at different locations: a main lens, a microlens array and a detector. These plenoptic systems have been presented as independent. Here we show the continuity between them, by simply moving the position of an object. We also compare the two reconstruction methods. We theoretically show that the two algorithms are intrinsically based on the same principle and could be applied to any LightField data. However, the resulting images resolution and quality depend on the chosen algorithm.

Depth-of-field comparison between the plenoptic camera 1.0 and 2.0

“…This, however, only works for the assumption that D M L >> B M LA holds. 8 For our experiments and in other work (D M L = 25mm and B M LA = 18.6mm) 14 the assumption does not hold true and thus Equation 1 must be fulfilled. For the simplified representation, we choose the same size for the ML and the sensor.…”

“…In this paper, we will always place the objects of interest at the same distance to the main lens to compare the different cameras. Georgiev and Lumsdaine, 12 Zhu et al 13 and Herzog et al 14 studied plenoptic cameras for spatial resolution, DoF and reconstruction algorithms. We describe the DoF mathematically for the two plenoptic camera systems and investigate it with simulations and experiments.…”

“…We describe the DoF mathematically for the two plenoptic camera systems and investigate it with simulations and experiments. Herzog et al 14 has applied both reconstruction algorithms to both systems, but only for one object distance. To the best of our knowledge we are the first to investigate both systems with their respective reconstruction algorithm and for a large object distance range.…”

Advanced light-field refocusing through tomographic modeling of the photographed scene

“…Without loss of generality we can identify again A z as the matrix representation of both the forward-projection operators in Eqs. (17) and (19), and A T z as the matrix representation of the back-projection operators in Eqs. (18) and 20.…”

“…In the FLF case, we have mainly the patch method [14], and a more sophisticated super-resolution method that explicitly takes into account the positioning of the pixels on the sensor [18]. Recently, in [19], the authors have demonstrated that the algorithms developed for one camera setup can be applied to the other setup. However, the resulting image resolutions and quality depend on the chosen algorithm.…”