data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66b3c/66b3c6eb33fd69b1bcdd5a402ca787b868ddbf2e" alt=""
Set of eight 1080x1920 images/views for which we want to build a dense 3D reconstruction with MVS10.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/38bd0/38bd0def0e6e1f1d3b57e9b3e1f5a13746adeede" alt=""
Animated gif showing the dense 3D reconstruction produced by MVS10 using downsampling factor = 4 (and sampling step = 2).
A downsampling factor of 4 means that the original images are downsampled (shrunk) by a factor of two twice. This dense 3D reconstruction has 351,520 3D points.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e5f39/e5f395e821401fbde97678f45c16a89b6b54d8a0" alt=""
Animated gif showing the dense 3D reconstruction produced by MVS10 using downsampling factor = 2 (and sampling step = 2).
A downsampling factor of 2 means that the original images are downsampled (shrunk) by a factor of two once. This dense reconstruction has 384,808.
Looking at the two animated gifs, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between the two reconstructions. The conclusion is that downsampling images in order to compute disparity maps faster is a-ok (as long as you don't overdo it and downsample too much).
No comments:
Post a Comment