Abstract
Natural or artificial vision systems process the images that they collect with their eyes or cameras in order to derive information for performing tasks related to navigation and recognition. Since the way images are acquired determines how dificult it is to perform a visual task, and since systems have to cope with limited resources, the eyes used by a specific system should be designed to optimize subsequent image processing as it relates to particular tasks. Different ways of sampling light, i.e., different eyes, may be less or more powerful with respect to particular competences. This seems intuitively evident in view of the variety of eye designs in the biological world. It is shown here that a spherical eye (an eye or system of eyes providing panoramic vision) is superior to a camera-type eye (an eye with restricted field of view) as regards the competence of three-dimensional motion estimation. This result is derived from a statistical analysis of all the possible computational models that can be used for estimating 3D motion from an image sequence. The findings explain biological design in a mathematical manner, by showing that systems that fly and thus need good estimates of 3D motion gain advantages from panoramic vision. Also, insights obtained from this study point to new ways of constructing powerful imaging devices that suit particular tasks in robotics, visualization and virtual reality better than conventional cameras, thus leading to a new camera technology.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Y. Aloimonos and A. Rosenfeld. Computer vision. Science, 253:1249–1254, 1991.
K. Daniilidis and M. E. Spetsakis. Understanding noise sensitivity in structure from motion. In Y. Aloimonos, editor, Visual Navigation: From Biological Systems to Unmanned Ground Vehicles, Advances in Computer Vision, chapter 4. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1997.
R. Dawkins. Climbing Mount Improbable. Norton, New York, 1996.
C. Fermuller and Y. Aloimonos. Direct perception of three-dimensional motion from patterns of visual motion. Science, 270:1973–1976, 1995.
C. Fermuller and Y. Aloimonos. Qualitative egomotion. International Journal of Computer Vision, 15:7–29, 1995.
C. Fermuller and Y. Aloimonos. Ambiguity in structure from motion: Sphere versus plane. International Journal of Computer Vision, 28:137–154, 1998.
C. Fermuller and Y. Aloimonos. What is computed by structure from motion algorithms? In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 359–375, Freiburg, Germany, 1998.
C. Fermuller, F. Defoort, and Y. Aloimonos. Motion segmentation for a binocular observer. Technical Report CAR-TR-884, Center for Automation Research, University of Maryland, April 1998.
T. Hamada. Vision, action, and navigation in animals. In Y. Aloimonos, editor, Visual Navigation: From Biological Systems to Unmanned Ground Vehicles, chapter 2. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1997.
E. Hildreth. Computations underlying the measurement of visual motion. Artificial Intelligence, 23:309–354, 1984.
B. K. P. Horn. Robot Vision. McGraw Hill, New York, 1986.
B. K. P. Horn and B. Schunck. Determining optical flow. Artificial Intelligence, 17:185–203, 1981.
B. K. P. Horn and E. J. Weldon, Jr. Direct methods for recovering motion. International Journal of Computer Vision, 2:51–76, 1988.
G. A. Horridge. What can engineers learn from insect vision? Proc. Royal Society, London B, August 1992.
J. J. Koenderink. Optic flow. Vision Research, 26:161–180, 1986.
K. N. Kutulakos and S. M. Seitz. What do N photographs tell us about 3D shape? Computer Science Technical Report 692, University of Rochester, 1998.
K. N. Kutulakos and J. R. Vallino. Calibration-free augmented reality. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 4:1–20, 1998.
M. Land and R. D. Fernald. The evolution of eyes. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 15:1–29, 1992.
H. C. Longuet-Higgins. A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two projections. Nature, 293:133–135, 1981.
H. C. Longuet-Higgins and K. Prazdny. The interpretation of a moving retinal image. Proc. Royal Society, London B, 208:385–397, 1980.
S. J. Maybank. Theory of Reconstruction from Image Motion. Springer, Berlin, 1993.
T. Poggio and W. Reichardt. Considerations on models of movement detection. Kybernetik, 13:223–227, 1973.
W. Reichardt. Autocorrelation, a principle for evaluation of sensory information by the central nervous system. In W. A. Rosenblith, editor, Sensory Communication: Contributions to the Symposium on Principles of Sensory Communication, pages 303–317. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1961.
W. Reichardt. Evaluation of optical motion information by movement detectors. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 161:533–547, 1987.
M. E. Spetsakis and J. Aloimonos. Optimal motion estimation. In Proc. IEEE Workshop on Visual Motion, pages 229–237, 1989.
M. V. Srinivasan, S. W. Zhang, and K. C. Shekara. Evidence for two distinct movement detecting mechanisms in insect vision. Naturwissenschaften, 80:38–41, 1993.
J. P. H. van Santen and G. Sperling. Temporal covariance model of human motion perception. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 1:451–473, 1984.
S. M. Zeki. A Vision of the Brain. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1993.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fermüller, C., Aloimonos, Y. (2001). Geometry of Eye Design: Biology and Technology. In: Klette, R., Gimel’farb, G., Huang, T. (eds) Multi-Image Analysis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2032. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45134-X_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45134-X_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42122-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45134-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive