A cost-benefit analysis of a third camera for stereo correspondence

Abstract

This paper looks at the twin issues of the gain in accuracy of stereo correspondence and the accompanying increase in computational cost due to the use of a third camera for stereo analysis. Trinocular stereo algorithms differ from binocular algorithms essentially in the epipolar constraint used in the local matching stage. The current literature does not provide any insight into the relative merits of binocular and trinocular stereo matching with the matching accuracy being verified aginst the ground truth. Experiments for evaluating the relative performance of binocular and trinocular stereo algorithms were conducted. The stereo images used for the performance evaluation were generated by applying a Lambertian reflectance model to real Digital Elevation Maps (DEMs) available from the U.S. Geological Survey. The matching accuracy of the stereo algorithms was evaluated by comparing the observed stereo disparity against the ground truth derived from the DEMs. It was observed that trinocular local matching reduced the percentage of mismatches having large disparity errors by more than half when compared to binocular matching. On the other hand, trinocular stereopsis increased the computational cost of local matching over binocular by only about one-fourth. We also present a quantization-error analysis of the depth reconstruction process for the nonparallel stereo-imaging geometry used in our experiments.