E-Mail Alert

Add your e-mail address to receive forthcoming issues of this journal:

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Special Issue "Time-of-Flight Range-Imaging Cameras"

Quicklinks

A special issue of Remote Sensing (ISSN 2072-4292).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 September 2011)

Special Issue Editors

Guest Editor
Dr. Fabio Remondino (Website)

3D Optical Metrology unit, Bruno Kessler Foundation, Trento, Italy
Fax: +39 0461 314340
Interests: photogrammetry; laser scanning; 3D reconstruction; 3D modeling; sensor integration
Guest Editor
Dr. David Stoppa

Smart Optical Sensors and Interfaces Unit, Bruno Kessler Foundation, Trento, Italy

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

3D Range-imaging and range-cameras are playing an important role in many research and application fields. Thanks to the Time-of-Flight measurement principle, range-cameras deliver simultaneously intensity images (2D) and ranges of the observed scene. They can feature different pixel architectures with advantages and disadvantages reflected in the delivered 3D images.

This special issue seeks research and review contributions from both the metrology and sensor communities covering the algorithms, methodologies, applications, developments and realizations of 3D time-of-flight range cameras. Topics include, but are not limited to:

- Geometric calibration
- Accuracy and performance evaluations
- Scene reconstruction and 3D modeling
- Integrated sensors for TOF Imaging
- SPAD-based 3D imaging
- 3D camera systems
- Indoor and robotics navigation
- Security, architectural, automotive and safety applications

Dr. Fabio Remondino
Dr. David Soppa
Guest Editors

Keywords

  • range cameras
  • Time-of-Flight (TOF)
  • 3D range imaging
  • active sensors
  • calibration
  • 3D modeling
  • CMOS/SPAD detectors
  • automotive
  • security

Published Papers (5 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-5
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle SR-4000 and CamCube3.0 Time of Flight (ToF) Cameras: Tests and Comparison
Remote Sens. 2012, 4(4), 1069-1089; doi:10.3390/rs4041069
Received: 9 February 2012 / Revised: 9 April 2012 / Accepted: 10 April 2012 / Published: 18 April 2012
Cited by 19 | PDF Full-text (1869 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
In this paper experimental comparisons between two Time-of-Flight (ToF) cameras are reported in order to test their performance and to give some procedures for testing data delivered by this kind of technology. In particular, the SR-4000 camera by Mesa Imaging AG and [...] Read more.
In this paper experimental comparisons between two Time-of-Flight (ToF) cameras are reported in order to test their performance and to give some procedures for testing data delivered by this kind of technology. In particular, the SR-4000 camera by Mesa Imaging AG and the CamCube3.0 by PMD Technologies have been evaluated since they have good performances and are well known to researchers dealing with Time-of-Flight (ToF) cameras. After a brief overview of commercial ToF cameras available on the market and the main specifications of the tested devices, two topics are presented in this paper. First, the influence of camera warm-up on distance measurement is analyzed: a warm-up of 40 minutes is suggested to obtain the measurement stability, especially in the case of the CamCube3.0 camera, that exhibits distance measurement variations of several centimeters. Secondly, the variation of distance measurement precision variation over integration time is presented: distance measurement precisions of some millimeters are obtained in both cases. Finally, a comparison between the two cameras based on the experiments and some information about future work on evaluation of sunlight influence on distance measurements are reported. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Time-of-Flight Range-Imaging Cameras)
Figures

Open AccessCommunication Beyond Range: Innovating Fluorescence Microscopy
Remote Sens. 2012, 4(1), 111-119; doi:10.3390/rs4010111
Received: 9 November 2011 / Revised: 20 December 2011 / Accepted: 29 December 2011 / Published: 5 January 2012
Cited by 4 | PDF Full-text (215 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Time-of-Flight (ToF) technologies are developed mainly for range estimations in industrial applications or consumer products. Recently, it was realized that ToF sensors could also be used for the detection of fluorescence and of the minute changes in the nanosecond-lived electronic states of [...] Read more.
Time-of-Flight (ToF) technologies are developed mainly for range estimations in industrial applications or consumer products. Recently, it was realized that ToF sensors could also be used for the detection of fluorescence and of the minute changes in the nanosecond-lived electronic states of fluorescent molecules. This capability can be exploited to report on the biochemical processes occurring within living organisms. ToF technologies, therefore, provide new opportunities in molecular and cell biology, diagnostics, and drug discovery. In this short communication, the convergence of the engineering and biomedical communities onto ToF technologies and its potential impact on basic, applied and translational sciences are discussed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Time-of-Flight Range-Imaging Cameras)
Open AccessArticle Understanding and Ameliorating Non-Linear Phase and Amplitude Responses in AMCW Lidar
Remote Sens. 2012, 4(1), 21-42; doi:10.3390/rs4010021
Received: 16 November 2011 / Revised: 9 December 2011 / Accepted: 16 December 2011 / Published: 23 December 2011
Cited by 13 | PDF Full-text (427 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Amplitude modulated continuous wave (AMCW) lidar systems commonly suffer from non-linear phase and amplitude responses due to a number of known factors such as aliasing and multipath inteference. In order to produce useful range and intensity information it is necessary to remove [...] Read more.
Amplitude modulated continuous wave (AMCW) lidar systems commonly suffer from non-linear phase and amplitude responses due to a number of known factors such as aliasing and multipath inteference. In order to produce useful range and intensity information it is necessary to remove these perturbations from the measurements. We review the known causes of non-linearity, namely aliasing, temporal variation in correlation waveform shape and mixed pixels/multipath inteference. We also introduce other sources of non-linearity, including crosstalk, modulation waveform envelope decay and non-circularly symmetric noise statistics, that have been ignored in the literature. An experimental study is conducted to evaluate techniques for mitigation of non-linearity, and it is found that harmonic cancellation provides a significant improvement in phase and amplitude linearity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Time-of-Flight Range-Imaging Cameras)
Open AccessArticle Figures of Merit for Indirect Time-of-Flight 3D Cameras: Definition and Experimental Evaluation
Remote Sens. 2011, 3(11), 2461-2472; doi:10.3390/rs3112461
Received: 26 September 2011 / Revised: 4 November 2011 / Accepted: 8 November 2011 / Published: 17 November 2011
Cited by 6 | PDF Full-text (329 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Indirect Time-of-Flight (I-TOF) cameras can be implemented in a number of ways, each with specific characteristics and performances. In this paper a comprehensive analysis of the implementation possibilities is developed in order to model the main performances with a high level of [...] Read more.
Indirect Time-of-Flight (I-TOF) cameras can be implemented in a number of ways, each with specific characteristics and performances. In this paper a comprehensive analysis of the implementation possibilities is developed in order to model the main performances with a high level of abstraction. After the extraction of the main characteristics for the high-level model, several figures of merit (FoM) are defined with the purpose of obtaining a common metric: noise equivalent distance, correlated and uncorrelated power responsivity, and background light rejection ratio. The obtained FoMs can be employed for the comparison of different implementations of range cameras based on the I-TOF method: specifically, they are applied for several different sensors developed by the authors in order to compare their performances. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Time-of-Flight Range-Imaging Cameras)
Open AccessArticle A Comparison of Three Geometric Self-Calibration Methods for Range Cameras
Remote Sens. 2011, 3(5), 1014-1028; doi:10.3390/rs3051014
Received: 25 March 2011 / Revised: 4 May 2011 / Accepted: 10 May 2011 / Published: 20 May 2011
Cited by 23 | PDF Full-text (400 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Significant instrumental systematic errors are known to exist in data captured with range cameras using lock-in pixel technology. Because they are independent of the imaged object scene structure, these errors can be rigorously estimated in a self-calibrating bundle adjustment procedure. This paper [...] Read more.
Significant instrumental systematic errors are known to exist in data captured with range cameras using lock-in pixel technology. Because they are independent of the imaged object scene structure, these errors can be rigorously estimated in a self-calibrating bundle adjustment procedure. This paper presents a review and a quantitative comparison of three methods for range camera self-calibration in order to determine which, if any, is superior. Two different SwissRanger range cameras have been calibrated using each method. Though differences of up to 2 mm (in object space) in both the observation precision and accuracy measures exist between the methods, they are of little practical consequence when compared to the magnitude of these measures (12 mm to 18 mm). One of the methods was found to underestimate the principal distance but overestimate the rangefinder offset in comparison to the other two methods whose estimates agreed more closely. Strong correlations among the rangefinder offset, periodic error terms and the camera position co-ordinates are indentified and their cause explained in terms of network geometry and observation range. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Time-of-Flight Range-Imaging Cameras)

Journal Contact

MDPI AG
Remote Sensing Editorial Office
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
remotesensing@mdpi.com
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
Editorial Board
Contact Details Submit to Remote Sensing
Back to Top