Slashdot Mirror


Disney Algorithm Builds High-Res 3D Models From Ordinary Photos

Zothecula writes "Disney Research has developed an algorithm which can generate 3D computer models from 2D images in great detail, sufficient, it says, to meet the needs of video game and film makers. The technology requires multiple images to capture the scene from a variety of vantage points. The 3D model is somewhat limited in that it is only coherent within the field of view encompassed by the original images. It does not appear to fill in data"

52 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Time Saver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is great for scenery, it is amazing how much effort goes into the background scenery that no one will really pay attention to, but if you get it wrong everyone pays attention suddenly.

  2. "It does not appear to fill in data" by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

    You just copy and pasted right before the punctuation mark for the summary?

  3. Primitive, useless tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The 3D model is somewhat limited in that it is only coherent within the field of view encompassed by the original images. It does not appear to fill in data

    Just have the CSI boys zoom and enhance. C'mon guys, they've been doing this for years.

    1. Re:Primitive, useless tech by ArcadeX · · Score: 2

      Just have the CSI boys zoom and enhance. C'mon guys, they've been doing this for years.

      Darkman did this in the early 90s, long before CSI was a glimmer in CBS's pocket book.

      --
      An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
    2. Re:Primitive, useless tech by tom17 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Excuse me?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHepKd38pr0 (Bladerunner)

      Bitch, please.

    3. Re:Primitive, useless tech by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      What am I supposed to bitch about? The video quality? The audio quality? The lighting? The blue blinking?

      They all stink!

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    4. Re:Primitive, useless tech by tom17 · · Score: 1

      THIS!

    5. Re:Primitive, useless tech by JDevers · · Score: 2

      To be fair, Bladerunner is set in a future world where technology is both far ahead of ours and seemingly behind ours in many ways (almost steampunk like...but forward thinking for a 1980s movie). If the camera that took that picture was more advanced than those today, it would be very possible for this to happen. Imagine a small snapshot taken with an 800 megapixel camera and this is very much possible, especially if one assumes that the actual "photo" uses might also contain an embedded memory fragment with the full resolution image.

    6. Re:Primitive, useless tech by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Jeez. Harrison Ford needs a MOUSE.

    7. Re:Primitive, useless tech by Wescotte · · Score: 1

      Just say enhance a few more times....

  4. New thing same as the old thing by icebike · · Score: 1

    The technology requires multiple images to capture the scene from a variety of vantage points.

    So simply the big difference here seems to be synthesis of properly spaced stereo cameras by using cameras positioned anywhere.

    But it sounds less impressive than some of the stereo movies released from older 2D movies where there wasn't any additional
    cameras, and someone simply assigned depths to parts of the image and put CGI to work on it.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:New thing same as the old thing by interiot · · Score: 1

      3D scanning is really important. Whenever we figure out how to do it faster/cheaper/easier, that's important. 3D scanning is useful for all kinds of future activities, from the maker movement (3D printer + 3D scanner = 3D copier), to gaming (eg. Kinect), to driving (eg. DARPA Grand Challenge), to mobile devices (eg. Google Glasses).

  5. Cheating by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Informative

    The technology requires multiple images to capture the scene from a variety of vantage points.

    That's cheating.

    1. Re:Cheating by rHBa · · Score: 1

      Finally, my 'What's my bra size' app can work!

  6. Kinect by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    Yes, its fairly easy to build a 3d model given enough input and the right algorithms. Look at all the 3d scanner software that uses kinect and multiple frames to construct a higher resolution model.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:Kinect by MickLinux · · Score: 2

      Easy? Not at all. IIRC, to be able to theoretically get the model, no... let me try again: to even determine where your cameras are and how they are oriented, you need to be able to define something like 11 points in 7 photos.

      At that, that just gets you to the point of having N equations, N unknowns. It doesn't give you the answer. Nor does it account for lens distortion. Throw in lens distortion, and you have that many more unknowns, therefore that many more points you'll need to define.

      Having thought about it more, since then, I have decided that that isn't the way to do it. The proper way to do it is something more akin to relaxation... but you still need sufficient points. You also have to be able to define what the "same point" is. That's not easy.

      That said, there are ways to make it easier. One is to first find which photos are closest to each other. To do that, you have to overlay the photos, and subtract the RGB values of each pixel. Then, run an FFT on the parts of the photos. The main frequency output of the FFT will tell you the probable shift-error in that part of the image. Try adjusting the photos that many pixels left/right/up/down (4 directions) until you find the best match, then rinse and repeat. Do this for all parts of the photo, and you will start to identify point alignments. Now work other photos together in a similar way, until you have a single network.

      THEN you can use relaxation to try to find your camera positions.

      THEN you can back-ray-trace, using I^4 correlation to get probable "glow spots", and then use that to generate your wireframe.

      And somehow, you have to account for objects that moved, or people who were walking. Yes, it can be done by identifying different objects, but...

      As I say, nothing easy about it.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    2. Re:Kinect by fatgraham · · Score: 1

      You can roughly calculate camera extrinsic and intrinsic (including lens distortion) parameters from 3 world coordinates. (Assuming they're all in the photos)
      One presumes with the amount of threshold and flexibility the system needs, that'll be plenty.

      It's not that bad, just needs a lot of tweaking to get things to err, give decent persistent output

    3. Re:Kinect by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      That's fine, if it's already known. But if it is unknown, then you've got a more difficult piece to chew on.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  7. Reminds me of that Outer Limits episode by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    ...where construction crews are responsible for building our universe every second. Somehow our hero accidentally falls into that realm, and sees some whitespace or voids. One of the crewmembers tells him, when nobody goes there, they don't really have to build it. That when one of their crew is negligent, and forgets to put stuff where they're supposed to be; this explains those incidents when you could have sworn you placed that hammer on that table a second ago...

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    1. Re:Reminds me of that Outer Limits episode by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Are you sure it wasn't The Twilight Zone? Based, as an AC says, on Theodore Sturgeon's Yesterday Was Monday.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Reminds me of that Outer Limits episode by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link! My 64M ram fails me...

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  8. Affine by tmarthal · · Score: 5, Informative

    The name of the algorithm is called 'affine reconstruction' and is a fairly well studied algorithm in computer vision. It is great that Disney and co. are releasing software to semi-automate the data input and reconstruction.

    1. Re:Affine by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      My question is, where is the software? All I saw on the Disney Research page was a Youtube video, and a link to white papers and links to download the original images. Just thinking how much I would love to take some old home movies and generate some semi-3D scenes from them. Could also be useful in 3D film conversions (although I thought that this was a similar approach to what they were already doing).

    2. Re:Affine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Possibly not for those particular use cases, but there certainly is already freely available software to do the "structure from motion" reconstruction trick; e.g., vSFM -- an easy(FSVO)-to-use frontend for a couple of tools from different research projects.

    3. Re:Affine by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      Oh cool, thanks, someone mod that up! I may play with this some when I get home. Now this leads to an additional quesion - both this, and the software from Disney, seems to focus mainly on buildings. I guess I can try myself, but I wonder how well this works with people? It would also be nice if I can feed in a video, but I guess I can always take my video, feed it into some video editing software and export as a jpeg or bmp securence or something.

    4. Re:Affine by Threni · · Score: 1

      I think you're confusing Disney with some other company which does open source graphics software...

  9. AutoCAD has a service for this by bradgoodman · · Score: 3, Informative
    It's called 123D Catch. They have an iPhone app and everything...

    http://www.123dapp.com/catch

    1. Re:AutoCAD has a service for this by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      It's called 123D Catch. They have an iPhone app and everything...

      http://www.123dapp.com/catch

      123D catch creates actual 3d models. in fact, any 123d catch demo is more impressive than this.. this is mostly useful for post process 3d effect to movies, it's one direction.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  10. Re:I think this has been done for some time now by MatthiasF · · Score: 4, Informative

    Autodesk has a service already available that does what the Disney does, it's called Recap.

    http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=21350337&siteID=123112

    They have a cloud service that can make full 3D models from photos.

  11. Not new by future+assassin · · Score: 2

    I have a program from the mid 90's that I got from a book about VRML http://www.amazon.com/Teach-Yourself-Vrml-Days-Sams/dp/1575211939 which would turn say buildings in photos into 3d objects. I think it was only a demo so never really tired it out to see if it worked.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  12. Re:This is newsworthy why? by Tr3vin · · Score: 1

    It could still be very useful for compositing 3D effects or actors into another scene. I think that is the use case that they are targeting here.

  13. the sky was blue as a TV with no input by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    Hey gramps, what the hell is a "Polaroid"? r * sin (Hemorrhoid) ?
    Next you'll go blathering on about irrational things like "phone books", when everybody all knows they're called Kindles.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re: the sky was blue as a TV with no input by z0 · · Score: 1

      So you would misunderstand the meaning of, "The sky above the port was the color of television tuned to a dead channel," thinking that meant RGB blue? Gibson was referring to the grey of random noise.

  14. NOT Ordinary Photos, paraller moving video by citizenr · · Score: 2
    --
    Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  15. Re:I weep, no seriously by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

    Apparently, your humor died in the 80s too.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  16. Dead actors, new movies by chuckugly · · Score: 2

    I wonder if all those frames that stored say, John Wayne, could be used to create a fairly good 3D likeness. If not now, maybe soon. Also, who would own the rights to those performances?

  17. Re:I weep, no seriously by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

    Considering I was born in the 60's, you get off my lawn, you whiny punk kid.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  18. Re:I think this has been done for some time now by dacut · · Score: 1

    See this page; the Campanile movie is from SIGGRAPH 97. How is Disney's tech different?

    I saw similar technology at CMU in around that same timeframe (late 90s).

    My memory will be obviously hazy here, but the resulting output was much less refined. A simple box-shaped house, for example, ended up having wickedly jagged walls. The technology showed promise, but it was far from realistic.

    The Disney folks, while not inventing the tech itself, seem to have taken it a step further. Their key claim -- "Unlike other systems, the algorithm calculates depth for every pixel, proving most effective at the edges of objects" -- certainly jives with my memory.

  19. Real scientitsts... by Arkh89 · · Score: 1

    ...use 4D light fields...

  20. Subliminal messages? by Phibz · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else notice flashing images on the screen while playing the video?

    I can't get it to stop exactly on the image but it looks like some sort of white and red striped thing near 7 seconds in to the video.

    Odd.

    1. Re:Subliminal messages? by Phibz · · Score: 1

      I hate responding to my own comment but I finally got it downloaded and stepped through the video.

      It's just a person in the shot wearing a white and red striped shirt.

    2. Re:Subliminal messages? by luckymutt · · Score: 1

      So was it Brad Pitt?

  21. photosynth by thisisnotreal · · Score: 1

    Wasn't this the first time? Photosynth demo.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-8k8GEGZPM

    1. Re:photosynth by thisisnotreal · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

  22. Revisiting Stereoscopy by aklinux · · Score: 2

    Overlap the photos you're taking by 60% & look at them through a Stereoscope... you get 3D.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereoscopy

  23. Low-cost, accurate CNC machines? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

    One problem with cheap and homebrew CNC machines is that the cutting head loses track of its own position. The feedback from CNC machines comes to the computer from sensors on the position screws of the various axes. These can lose their calibration. I keep thinking that with this kind of technology, a computer can "visually" determine the precise position of the cutting head and also of the material being cut. It can update the computer constantly on the exact shape of the remaining material, and then compare it to the design and calculate what else needs to be cut away. Basically, all of the feedback can potentially be just optical, but of course, the computer can "eyeball it" much more accurately than a person. Because good cameras are cheap and CPU cycles are cheap, I think this could be the basis of a very flexible and affordable CNC machine. I suppose it would be important to have a good sawdust removal system, because that could potentially obscure the view - although I guess the cutting head itself could be used to sweep it away.

    1. Re:Low-cost, accurate CNC machines? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Usually stepper motors are used. These *can* lose track of their position but it is typically not an issue. It would mean that something had jammed or bound.

  24. Remember Canoma? by Hecatonchires · · Score: 1

    From Wikipedia:
    Released by MetaCreations Corp. in 1999, this application allowed users to create 3D models based on one or more photographs taken from various angles.

    Great program. Never understood why it died. Assume it was corporate hijinks.

    --

    Yay me!

  25. disney algorithm by l3v1 · · Score: 2

    In another news, the Sun is shining. I mean seriously, light-field based 3D reconstruction has been around for many years. Hell, even one of my colleagues has built a rotating table-based camera setup to capture images and create a full 3D model. Just google light fields 3D reconstruction or structure from motion and smell the coffee.

    Yeah, great news.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  26. The future is now? by the_arrow · · Score: 1

    So art imitating life, or life imitating art? Just saw the Futurama episode Forty percent leadbelly in which Bender takes a 2-D photo of a guitar, and gets it duplicated by a 3-D printer. Seems we are in the future already!

    --
    / The Arrow
    "How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
  27. Re:This is newsworthy why? by omnichad · · Score: 1

    Like adding even more digital extras into the future re-releases of A New Hope.

  28. Re:I think this has been done for some time now by Wescotte · · Score: 1

    You got some Reddit love awhile back so quit your bitching :)