[Bf-committers] LibMV versus OpenCV / VXL

[Vilem Novak]

Hello, 
just few notes:
libmv development started specifically for use in blender several years ago.
I am not sure if the talk here is about use in compositor too, but libmv is as far as I know mainly targeted for "robust" camera motion matching.
At the same time, it should be of course usable for various compositing tasks(point tracking, video stabilisation).
I dont know about VXL, but OPENCV has far more than that(so new dep. size is bigger),
 while I don't remember seeing a good 3d reconstruction demo with it.
Sincerely
Vilem


> ------------ Původní zpráva ------------
> Od: Troy Sobotka <troy.sobotka at gmail.com>
> Předmět: [Bf-committers] LibMV versus OpenCV / VXL
> Datum: 21.4.2011 07:38:55
> ----------------------------------------
> Just read Tom M's posting on LibMV and was wondering where the
> discussions have taken place for it regarding future directions.
> 
> Nuke apparently (according to the User Guide[1]) harnesses VXL for
> some of its algorithms. OpenCV, for example, has a simple relevant
> point optical flow tracking example (lkdemo.cpp 151 lines of code[2])
> that would seem to at least be worth examining, if it hasn't already
> been considered.[3]
> 
> I am wondering the upside benefit of pushing LibMV over existing options.
> 
> Sincerely,
> TJS
> 
> [1]
> http://thefoundry.s3.amazonaws.com/products/nuke/documentation/NukeUserGuide_6.1v5.pdf
> [2]
> https://code.ros.org/trac/opencv/browser/trunk/opencv/samples/cpp/lkdemo.cpp?rev=4240
> [3] I am aware of Ton's reluctance to add another dependency, but
> perhaps the complexity of computing vision here warrants it?
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> 
> 
>