Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40292899›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Evaluation of Network Design and Solutions of Fisheye Camera Calibration for 3D Reconstruction.

Sina Rezaei, Hossein Arefi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sina Rezaeii3mainz-Institute for Spatial Information and Surveying Technology, School of Technology, Mainz University of Applied Sciences, D-55118 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0009-0004-6116-6300
Hossein Arefii3mainz-Institute for Spatial Information and Surveying Technology, School of Technology, Mainz University of Applied Sciences, D-55118 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8014-624X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolution of photogrammetry has been significantly influenced by advancements in camera technology, particularly the emergence of spherical cameras. These devices offer extensive photographic coverage and are increasingly utilised in many photogrammetry applications due to their significant user-friendly configuration, especially in their low-cost versions. Despite their advantages, these cameras are subject to high image distortion. This necessitates specialised calibration solutions related to fisheye images, which represent the primary geometry of the raw files. This paper evaluates fisheye calibration processes for the effective utilisation of low-cost spherical cameras, for the purpose of 3D reconstruction and the verification of geometric stability. Calibration optical parameters include focal length, pixel positions, and distortion coefficients. Emphasis was placed on the evaluation of solutions for camera calibration, calibration network design, and the assessment of software or toolboxes that support the correspondent geometry and calibration for processing. The efficiency in accuracy, correctness, computational time, and stability parameters was assessed with the influence of calibration parameters based on the accuracy of the 3D reconstruction. The assessment was conducted using a previous case study of graffiti on an underpass in Wiesbaden, Germany. The robust calibration solution is a two-step calibration process, including a pre-calibration stage and the consideration of the best possible network design. Fisheye undistortion was performed using OpenCV, and finally, calibration parameters were optimized with self-calibration through bundle adjustment to achieve both calibration parameters and 3D reconstruction using Agisoft Metashape software. In comparison to 3D calibration, self-calibration, and a pre-calibration strategy, the two-step calibration process has demonstrated an average improvement of 2826 points in the 3D sparse point cloud and a 0.22 m decrease in the re-projection error value derived from the front lens images of two individual spherical cameras. The accuracy and correctness of the 3D point cloud and the statistical analysis of parameters in the two-step calibration solution are presented as a result of the quality assessment of this paper and in comparison with the 3D point cloud produced by a laser scanner.

Indexed as

3D reconstructionaccuracycamera calibrationfisheye lensnetwork designspherical camera

Identifiers

PMID40292899
PMCPMC11946386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.