Author Affiliations
1School of Electronics and Information Engineering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China2Experimental Teaching Center on Computer Science, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China3Gansu Provincial Engineering Research Center for Artificial Intelligence and Graphic & Image Processing, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China;show less
Fig. 1. Reconstruction process of PMVS algorithm
Fig. 2. Reconstruction process of improved PMVS algorithm
Fig. 3. Process flow chart of concurrent SIFT operator based on image block
Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of image segmentation strategy
Fig. 5. Constraint relationship between feature point f and potential candidate matching point f'
Fig. 6. Detected results of features. (a) Four terrain images of features to be detected; (b) detected results of features by Harris operator; (c) detected results of features by SIFT operator; (d) detected results of features by improving SIFT operator
Fig. 7. Reconstruction results of two areas using PMVS algorithm and proposed algorithm. (a) Images to be reconstructed; (b) reconstruction results of PMVS algorithm; (c) reconstruction results of proposed algorithm
Fig. 8. Reconstruction results of two areas using PMVS algorithm and proposed algorithm. (a) Images to be reconstructed; (b) reconstruction results of PMVS; (c) reconstruction results of ours
Image resolution | Feature point extraction time /s |
---|
Harris operator | SIFT operator | Improved SIFT operator |
---|
2457×2000 | 0.986174 | 2.742134 | 1.028954 | 2451×2000 | 0.909185 | 1.857654 | 0.897063 | 1765×1768 | 0.541461 | 1.258614 | 0.695861 | 2451×2000 | 0.995364 | 2.814587 | 1.085487 |
|
Table 1. Time performance comparison of Harris operator, SIFT operator, and improved SIFT operator
Image resolution | NORP of PMVS | NORP of improved PMVS | PER /% | Time of PMVS /s | Time of improved PMVS /s | Time increase rate /% |
---|
2457×2000 | 159894 | 166922 | ~4.4 | 10.958 | 9.587 | ~12.5 | 2451×2000 | 210251 | 222081 | ~5.6 | 10.726 | 9.191 | ~14.3 | 1765×1768 | 189487 | 201693 | ~6.4 | 9.624 | 8.587 | ~10.8 | 2451×2000 | 217687 | 232025 | ~6.6 | 10.986 | 9.486 | ~13.7 |
|
Table 2. Comparison of reconstruction performance between original PMVS algorithm and improved PMVS algorithm