Geometric Calibration and Orientation

of Digital Imaging Systems

Dipl.- Ing. Robert Godding

AICON 3D Systems GmbH
Celler Str. 32
38114 Braunschweig
robert.godding@aicon.de
www.aicon.de

1
 Contents
1 ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................3

2 DEFINITIONS ...........................................................................................................4

2.1 Camera calibration............................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Camera orientation ............................................................................................................ 4

2.3 System calibration .............................................................................................................. 4

3 INFLUENCE OF INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR EFFECTS ON GEOMETRICAL

PERFORMANCE .............................................................................................................5

3.1 Interior effects .................................................................................................................... 5

3.1.1 Optical system .............................................................................................................. 5
3.1.2 Resolution-enhancing elements.................................................................................... 5
3.1.3 Sensor and signal transfer............................................................................................. 6

3.2 Exterior effects.................................................................................................................... 6

4 MODEL OF IMAGE FORMATION WITH THE AID OF OPTICAL SYSTEMS ...........7

5 CAMERA MODELS ..................................................................................................8

5.1 Calibrated focal length and principal-point location...................................................... 9

5.2 Distortion and affinity........................................................................................................ 9

5.2.1 Radial symmetrical distortion..................................................................................... 10
5.2.2 Radially asymmetrical and tangential distortion ........................................................ 11
5.2.3 Affinity and non-orthogonality................................................................................... 12
5.2.4 Additional parameters ................................................................................................ 12

6 CALIBRATION AND ORIENTATION TECHNIQUES..............................................13

6.1 In the laboratory............................................................................................................... 13

6.2 Using bundle adjustment to determine camera parameters ........................................ 13

6.2.1 Calibration based exclusively on image information ................................................. 14
6.2.2 Calibration and orientation with the aid of additional object information................. 16
6.2.3 System calibration ...................................................................................................... 17

7 BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................................................................18

2
1 Abstract

The use of digital imaging systems for metrology purposes implies the necessity to
calibrate or check these systems. While simultaneous calibration of cameras during
plotting is possible for many types of photogrammetric work, separate calibration and
checking is useful above all in the following cases:

When information is desired about the attainable accuracy of the measurement system
and thus about the measurement accuracy at the object;
• when simultaneous calibration of the measurement system is impossible during
measurement for systemic reasons so that some or all other system parameters have to
be predetermined;
• when complete imaging systems or components are to be tested by the manufacturer
for quality-control purposes;
• when digital images free from the effects of the imaging system are to be generated in
preparation of further processing steps (such as rectification).

In addition, when setting up measurement systems it will be necessary to determine the

positions of cameras or other sensors in relation to a higher-order world coordinate
system to allow 3D determination of objects within these systems.

The paper describes methods of calibration and orientation of imaging systems, focusing
primarily on photogrammetric techniques since these permit homologous and highly
accurate determination of the parameters required.

3
2 Definitions

2.1 Camera calibration

Calibration in photogrammetric parlance refers to the determination of the parameters of
interior orientation of individual cameras. When using digital cameras, it is advisable to
analyze the complete imaging system, including camera, transfer units and possibly frame
grabbers. The parameters to be found by calibration depend on the type of camera used.
Once the imaging system has been calibrated, measurements can be made after the
cameras have been duly oriented.

2.2 Camera orientation

Camera orientation usually includes determination of the parameters of exterior
orientation to define the camera station and camera axis in the higher-order object-
coordinate system, frequently called the world coordinate system. This requires the
determination of three rotational and three translational parameters - i.e. a total of six
parameters - for each camera.

2.3 System calibration

In many applications, fixed setups of various sensors are used for measurement.
Examples are online measurement systems in which, for example, several cameras, laser
pointers, pattern projectors, rotary stages, etc. may be used. If the entire system is
considered the measurement tool proper, then the simultaneous calibration and
orientation of all the components involved may be defined as system calibration.

4
3 Influence of interior and exterior effects on geometrical performance

3.1 Interior effects

All components of a digital imaging system leave their marks on the image of an object
and thus on the measurement results obtained from processing this image. The following
is a brief description of the relevant components (Fig. 1).

Resolution enhancing
elements

Piezo adjustment
Mechanical system
Réseau

Optics Sensor Image storage

Signal transfer

Internal synchronisation
External synchronisation
Pixel-synchronous
Digital transfer

Fig. 1: Components of digital imaging systems

3.1.1 Optical system

Practically all lenses exhibit typical radially symmetrical distortion that may vary greatly in
magnitude. On the one hand, the lenses used in optical measurement systems are nearly
distortion-free [Godding 1993], on the other wide-angle lenses, above all, frequently
exhibit distortion of several 100 µm at the edges of the field. Fisheye lenses are in a class
of their own; they frequently have extreme distortion at the edges. Since radially
symmetrical distortion is a function of design, it cannot be considered an aberration.

By contrast, centering errors often unavoidable in lens making cause aberrations reflected
in radially asymmetrical and tangential distortion components [Brown 1966]. Additional
optical elements in the light path, such as the IR barrier filter and protective filter of the
sensor, also leave their mark on the image and have to be made allowance for in the
calibration of a system.

3.1.2 Resolution-enhancing elements

The image size and the possible resolution of CCD sensors are limited. Presently on the
market are metrology cameras like Rollei's Q16 MetricCamera with up to 4000 * 4000
sensor elements [Schafmeister 1998]. Other, less frequent approaches use techniques
designed to attain higher resolution by shifting commercial sensors parallel to the image
plane. Essentially, there are two different techniques.

5
In the case of "microscanning", the interline transfer CCD sensors are shifted by minute
amounts by means of piezo adjustment so that the light-sensitive sensor elements fall
within the gaps between elements typical of this type of system, where they acquire
additional image information [Lenz and Lenz 1990], [Richter 1993]. Alternatively, in
"macroscanning", the sensors may be shifted by a multiple of their own size, resulting in a
larger image format. Individual images are then oriented with respect to the overall image
either by a highly precise mechanical system [Poitz 1993] [Holdorf 1993] or opto-
numerically as in the RolleiMetric Réseau Scanning Camera by measuring a glass-based
reference grid in the image plane ("réseau scanning") [Riechmann 1992].

All resolution-enhancing elements affect the overall accuracy of the imaging system. In
scanner systems with purely mechanical correlation of individual images, the accuracy of
the stepping mechanism has a direct effect on the geometry of the high-resolution
imagery. In the case of réseau scanning, the accuracy of the réseau is decisive for the
attainable image measuring accuracy [Bösemann, Godding, Riechmann 1990].

3.1.3 Sensor and signal transfer

Due to their design, CCD sensors usually offer high geometrical accuracy [Lenz 1988].
When judging an imaging system, its sensor should be assessed in conjunction with the
frame grabber used. Geometrical errors of different magnitude may occur during A/D
conversion of the video signal, depending on the type of synchronization, above all if
pixel-synchronous signal transfer from camera to image storage is not guaranteed [Beyer
1992] [Bösemann, Godding, Riechman 1990]. However, in the case of pixel-synchronous
readout of data, the additional transfer of the pixel clock pulse makes sure that each
sensor element will precisely match a picture element in the image storage. Very high
accuracy has been proved for these types of camera [Godding 1993]. However, even with
this type of transfer the square shape of individual pixels cannot be taken for granted. As
with any kind of synchronization, most sensor-storage combinations make it necessary to
make allowance for an affinity factor; in other words, the pixels may have different
extension in the direction of lines and columns.

3.2 Exterior effects

If several cameras are used in an online metrology system, both the parameters of
interior orientation and those of exterior orientation may vary, the former, for example,
due to refocusing and changes of temperature, the latter due to mechanical effects or
fluctuations of temperature. The resulting effects range from scale errors during object
measurement right up to complex model deformation. This is why all systems of this kind
should make it possible to check or redetermine all relevant parameters.

6
4 Model of image formation with the aid of optical systems

Image formation by an optical system can, in principle, be described by the mathematical

rules of central perspective. According to these, an object is imaged in a plane so that the
object points Pi and the corresponding image points P'i are located on straight lines
through the perspective center Oj (Fig. 2). The following holds under idealized conditions
for the formation of a point image in the image plane

 x ij  − c  X * ij 
 = *  *  (1)
 yij  Z ij Y ij 
with
 X *ij   X i − Xo j 
 *   
Y ij  = D(ω , ϕ ,κ ) j Yi − Yo j  (2)
 *   
 Z ij  Z i − Zo j 
where
Xi, Yi, Zi are the coordinates of an object point Pi in the object-coordinate system K,
Xoj, Yoj, Zoj the coordinates of the perspective center Oj in the object-coordinate system K,
X*ij, Y*ij, Z*ij the coordinates of the object point Pi in the coordinate system K*j,
xij, yij the coordinates of the image point in the image-coordinate system KB, and
D(ω,ϕ,κ)j the rotation matrix between K and K*j as well as
c the distance between perspective center and image plane,
the system K*j being parallel to the system KB with the origin in the perspective center Oj
[Wester-Ebbinghaus 1989].

The above representation splits up the process of image formation in such a manner that
in (1) it is primarily the image-space parameters and in (2) primarily the object-space
parameters - i.e. the parameters of exterior orientation - that come to bear.

This ideal concept is not attained in reality where a multitude of influences are
encountered due to the different components of the imaging system. These can be
modeled as departures from rigorous central perspective. The following section describes
various approaches to mathematical camera models.

7
5 Camera models

When optical systems are used for measurement, modeling the entire process of image
formation is decisive for the accuracy to be attained. Basically the same ideas apply, for
example, to projection systems for which models can be set up similarly to imaging
systems.

Fig. 2: Principle of central perspective [Dold 1994]

Before we continue, we have to define an image-coordinate system KB in the image plane

of the camera. In most electrooptical cameras, this image plane is defined by the sensor
plane; only in special designs (e.g. in réseau scanning cameras [Riechmann 1992]), this
plane is differently defined. While in the majority of analog cameras used for metrology
purposes the image-coordinate system is defined by projected fiducial marks or réseau
crosses, this definition is not required for digital cameras. Here it is entirely sufficient to
place the origin of the image-coordinate system in the center of the digital images in the
storage (Fig. 3). Since the pixel interval in column direction in the storage is equal to the
interval of the corresponding sensor elements, the unit "pixel in column direction" may
serve as a unit of measure in the image space. All parameters of interior orientation can
be directly computed in this unit, without conversion to metric values.

8
 Fig. 3: Definition of image-coordinate system

5.1 Calibrated focal length and principal-point location

The reference axis for the camera model is not the optical axis in its physical sense, but a
principal ray which on the object side is perpendicular to the image plane defined above
and intersects the latter at the principal point PH (xH, yH). The perspective center Oj is
located at distance cK (also known as calibrated focal length) perpendicularly in front of
the principal point [Rüger, Pietschner, Regensburger 1978].

The original formulation of Eq. (1) is thus expanded as follows:

 xij  − ck  X *ij   x H 
 = *  * +  (3)
 yij  Z ij Y ij   y H 

5.2 Distortion and affinity

The following additional correction function can be applied to Eq. (3) for radially
symmetrical, radial asymmetrical and tangential distortion.

 xij  − ck  X *ij   x H  dx (V , A) 

 = *  * + +  (4)
 yij  Z ij Y ij   y H  dy (V , A) 

dx and dy may now be defined differently, depending on the type of camera used, and are
made up of the following different components:
dx = dx sym + dx asy + dx aff (5)

dy = dy sym + dy asy + dy aff (6)

9
5.2.1 Radial symmetrical distortion

The radial symmetrical distortion typical of a lens can generally be expressed with
sufficient accuracy by a polynomial of odd powers of the image radius (xij and yij are
henceforth called x and y for the sake of simplicity):

drsym = A1 (r 3 − r02 r ) + A2 (r 5 − r04 r ) + A3 (r 7 − r06 r ) (7)

where
drsym is the radial symmetrical distortion correction,
r the image radius from .r² = x² + y²,
A1, A2, A3 the polynomial coefficients, and
r0 the second zero crossing of the distortion curve,

so that we obtain
drsym
dx sym = x (8)
r
drsym
dy sym = y (9)
r

A polynomial with two coefficients is generally sufficient to describe radial symmetrical

distortion. Expanding this distortion model, it is possible to describe even lenses with
pronounced departure from perspective projection (e.g. fisheye lenses) with sufficient
accuracy; in the case of very pronounced distortion it is advisable to introduce an
additional point of symmetry PS (xS,yS). Fig. 4 shows a typical distortion curve.

For numerical stabilization and far-reaching avoidance of correlations between the

coefficients of the distortion function and the calibrated focal lengths, a linear component
of the distortion curve is split off by specifying a second zero crossing [Wester-
Ebbinghaus 1980].

35.462 dR [µm]

R [mm]

0.4 0.9 1.4 1.8 2.3 2.7 3.1 3.6 4.0 4.5

-35.462

-70.924

-106.386

-141.848

-177.310

-212.773

-248.235

-283.697

RADIALSYMMETRISCHE VERZEICHNUNG
IPB Aufnahmesystem: Grundig FA85 mit Schneider Xenoplan 1.8/6.5
: Verzeichnungskurve; : Standardabweichung
TU Braunschweig

Fig. 4: Typical distortion curve of a lens

10
[Lenz 1987] proposes a different formulation for determining radially symmetrical
distortion, which includes only one coefficient. We thus obtain the following formula:

1 − 1 − 4 Kr 2
drsym = r (10)
1 + 1 − 4 Kr 2

where K is the distortion coefficient to be determined.

5.2.2 Radially asymmetrical and tangential distortion

To cover radially asymmetrical and tangential distortion, various different formulations are
possible. Based on [Conrady 1919], these distortion components may be formulated as
follows [Brown1966]:

dxasy = B1 (r 2 + 2 x 2 ) + 2 B2 xy (11)

dyasy = B2 (r 2 + 2 y 2 ) + 2 B1 xy (12)

In other words, these effects are always described with the two additional parameters B1
and B2.

This formulation is expanded by [Brown 1976], who adds parameters to describe overall
image deformation or the lack of image-plane flatness.
dxasy = ( D1 ( x 2 − y 2 ) + D2 x 2 y 2 + D3( x 4 − y 4 )) x / cK
(13)
+ E1 xy + E 2 y 2 + E 3 x 2 y + E 4 xy 2 + E5 x 2 y 2

dyasy = ( D1( x 2 − y 2 ) + D2 x 2 y 2 + D3( x 4 − y 4 )) y / c K

(14)
+ E6 xy + E7 x 2 + E8 x 2 y + E9 xy 2 + E10 x 2 y 2

In view of the large number of coefficients, however, this formulation implies a certain risk
of too many parameters. Moreover, since this model was primarily developed for large-
format analog imaging systems, some of the parameters cannot be directly interpreted for
applications using digital imaging systems. Equations (8) and (9) are generally sufficient
to describe asymmetrical effects. Fig. 5 shows typical effects for radially symmetrical and
tangential distortion.

11
5.2.3 Affinity and non-orthogonality
The differences in length and width of the pixels in the image storage caused by
synchronization can be taken into account by an affinity factor. In addition, an affinity
direction may be determined, which primarily describes the orthogonality of the axes of
the image-coordinate system KB. An example may be a line scanner that does not move
perpendicular to the line direction. Allowance for these two effects can be made as
follows:
dxaff = C1 x + C2 y (15)

dyaff = 0 (16)
Fig. 6 gives an example of the effect of affinity.

ASYMMETRISCHE EFFEKTE AUSWIRKUNGEN DER AFFINITAET

IPB Aufnahmesystem: Grundig FA85 mit Schneider Xenoplan 1.8/6.5
Einheit der Vektoren: [µm] 0.8050
TU Braunschweig IPB Aufnahmesystem: Grundig FA85 mit Schneider Xenoplan 1.8/6.5
Einheit der Vektoren: [µm] 100.72
TU Braunschweig

Fig. 5: Radially symmetrical and Fig. 6: Effects of affinity

tangential distortion

5.2.4 Additional parameters

The introduction of additional parameters may be of interest for special applications.
[Fryer 1989] and [Fraser and Shortis 1992] describe formulations that also make
allowance for distance-related components of distortion. However, these are primarily
effective with medium and large image formats and the corresponding lenses and are of
only minor importance for the wide field of digital uses.

[Gerdes, Otterbach and Kammüller 1993] use a different camera model in which an
additional two parameters have to be determined for the oblique position of the sensor.

12
6 Calibration and orientation techniques

6.1 In the laboratory

Distortion parameters can be determined in the laboratory under clearly defined
conditions.

In the goniometer method, a highly precise grid plate is positioned in the image plane of a
camera. Then the goniometer is used to sight the grid intersections from the object side
and to determine the corresponding angles. Distortion values can then be obtained by a
comparison between nominal and actual values.

In the collimator technique, test patterns are projected onto the image plane by several
collimators set up at defined angles to each other. Here also, the parameters of interior
orientation can be obtained by a comparison between nominal and actual values, though
only for cameras focused at infinity [Rüger, Pietschner, Regensburger 1978].

Apart from this restriction, there are more reasons speaking against the use of the
aforementioned laboratory techniques for calibrating digital imaging systems, including
the following:

• The equipment layout is high.

• The interior orientation of the cameras used normally is not stable, requiring regular
recalibration by the user.
• Interior orientation including distortion varies at different focus and aperture settings
so that calibration under practical conditions appears more appropriate.

6.2 Using bundle adjustment to determine camera parameters

All the parameters required for calibration and orientation may be obtained by means of
photogrammetric bundle adjustment. In bundle adjustment, two so-called observation
equations are set up for each point measured in an image, based on Eqs. (2) and (4).
The total of all equations for the image points of all corresponding object points results in
a system that makes it possible to determine the unknown parameters [WESTER-
EBBINGHAUS 1985a]. Since this is a nonlinear system of equations, no linearization is
initially necessary. The computation is made iteratively by the method of least squares,
the unknowns being determined in such a way that the squares of deviations are
minimized at the image coordinates observed. Newer approaches are working with
modern algorithms like balanced parameter estimation [Fellbaum 1996]. Bundle
adjustment thus allows simultaneous determination of the unknown object coordinates,
exterior orientation and interior orientation with all relevant system parameters of the
imaging system. In addition, standard deviations are computed for all parameters, which
give a measure of the quality of the imaging system.

13
6.2.1 Calibration based exclusively on image information
This method is particularly well-suited for calibrating individual imaging systems. It
requires a survey of a field of points in a geometrically stable photogrammetric assembly.
The points need not include any points with known object coordinates (control points); the
coordinates of all points need only be known approximately [Wester- Ebbinghaus 1985a].
It is, however, necessary that the point field be stable for the duration of image
acquisition. The scale of the point field likewise has no effect on the determination of the
desired image-space parameters. Fig. 7 shows a point field suitable for calibration.

Fig. 7: Test array for camera calibration

The accuracy of the system studied can be judged from the residual mismatches of the
image coordinates as well as the standard deviation of the unit of weight after adjustment
(Fig. 8). The effect of synchronization errors, for example, becomes immediately
apparent, for instance by larger residual mismatches of different magnitude in line and
column direction.

14
 RESTKLAFFUNGEN DER BILDKOORDINATEN
IPB Aufnahmesystem: Grundig FA85 mit Schneider Xenoplan 1.8/6.5
Einheit der Vektoren: [µm] 0.7320
TU Braunschweig

Fig. 8: Residual mismatches after bundle adjustment

Fig. 9 gives a diagrammatic view of the minimum setup for surveying a point array with
which the aforementioned system parameters can be determined. The array my be a
three-dimensional test field with a sufficient number of properly distributed, circular,
retroreflecting targets. This test field is first recorded in three frontal images, with camera
g g
and field at an angle of 100 for determining affinity and 200 for determining the location
of the principal point. In addition, four convergent images of the test field are used to give
the assembly the necessary geometric stability for determination of the object coordinates
and to minimize correlations with exterior orientation.
Optimum use of the image format is a precondition for the determination of distortion
parameters. However, this requirement need not be satisfied for all individual images. It is
sufficient if the image points of all images cover the format uniformly and completely.
If this setup is followed, seven images will be obtained roughly as shown in Fig. 10, their
outer frame standing for the image format, the inner frame for the image of the square
test field and the arrowhead for the position of the test field. It is generally preferable to
rotate the test field with the aid of a suitable suspension in front of the camera instead of
moving the camera for image acquisition. The use of retroreflecting targets and a ring
light guarantee proper, high-contrast reproduction of the object points, which is
indispensable for precise and reliable measurement. A complete, commercially available
software package offering far-reaching automation of the process is described in
[Godding 1993].

4. 6.
1.

2.

3.
5. 7.

Fig. 9: Imaging setup for calibration Fig. 10: Test field

[Godding 1993]

15
6.2.2 Calibration and orientation with the aid of additional object information
Once the imaging system has been calibrated, its orientation can be found by resection in
space. The latter may be seen as a special bundle adjustment in which the parameters of
interior orientation and the object coordinates are known. This requires a minimum of
three control points in space whose object coordinates in the world coordinate system are
known and whose image points have been measured with the imaging system to be
oriented.

In addition to orientation, calibration of an imaging system is also possible with a single

image. However, since a single image does not allow the object coordinates to be
determined, suitable information within the object has to be available in the form of a
three-dimensional control-point array [Wester-Ebbinghaus, 1985b]. But constructing,
maintaining and regularly checking such an array is rather costly, all the more so as it
should be mobile so that it may be used for different applications. The control pattern
should completely fill the measurement range of the cameras to be calibrated and
oriented to ensure good agreement between calibration and measurement volumes.

The expense is considerably less if several images are available. For a two-image
assembly and one camera, a spatial array of points that need to be known only
approximately plus, as additional information, several known distances (scales) distributed
in the object space will be sufficient, similar to section 6.2.1. In an ideal case, one scale
on the camera axis, another one perpendicular to it and two oblique scales in two
perpendicular planes parallel to the camera axis are required (Fig. 11). This will
considerably reduce the object-side expense, since the creation and checking of scales is
much simpler than that of an extensive three-dimensional array of control points.

A similar setup is possible if the double-image assembly is recorded with several cameras
instead of just one. This is, in principle, the case with online measurement systems. An
additional scale is then required in the foreground of the object space, bringing the total
number of scales to five (Fig. 12).

If at least one of the two cameras can be rolled, the oblique scales can be dispensed with,
provided that the rolled image is used for calibration [Wester-Ebbinghaus 1985b].

K1 K
2

K K1
1

Fig. 11: Scale setup for calibrating one camera Fig. 12: Scale setup for calibrating two
cameras

16
The setups described are, of course, applicable to more than two cameras as well. In
other words, all the cameras of a measurement system can be calibrated if the above
mentioned conditions are created for each of the cameras. At least two cameras have to
be calibrated in common, with the scales set up as described. Simultaneous calibration of
all cameras is also possible, but then the scale information must also be simultaneously
available to all the cameras. If all cameras also are to be calibrated in common, this will
have to be done via common points.

6.2.3 System calibration

As we have seen from sections 6.2.1 and 6.2.2, joint calibration and orientation of all
cameras involved and thus calibration of the entire system are possible if certain
conditions are met. With the aid of bundle adjustment, the two problems can, in principle,
be solved jointly with a suitable array of control points or a spatial point array of unknown
coordinates plus additional scales. The cameras then already are in measurement
position during calibration. Possible correlations between the exterior and interior
orientations required are thus neutralized because the calibration setup is identical to the
measurement setup.

Apart from the imaging systems, other components can be calibrated and oriented within
the framework of system calibration. Luhmann and Godding [1992] describe a technique
in which a suitable procedure in an online measurement system allows both the interior
and exterior orientation of the cameras involved as well as the orientation of a rotary
stage to be determined with the aid of a spatial point array and additional scales. The
calibration of a line projector within a measurement system using photogrammetric
techniques was e. g. presented by Strutz [1993].

17
7 Bibliography

ABDEL-AZIZ, Y. J., KARARA, H. M. 1971: Direct Linear Transformation from Compara-

tor Coordinates into Object Space Coordinates in Close Range Photogrammetry,
Symposium of the American Society of Photogrammetry on Close Range
Photogrammety, Fall Church, Virginia 1971.
BEYER, H., 1992: Advances in Characterisation and Calibration of Digital Imaging
Systems, International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Com. V, Vol.
XXIX, pp. 545 - 555, 17. ISPRS Kongress Washington 1992.
BÖSEMANN, W., GODDING, R., RIECHMANN, W. 1990: Photogrammetric Investigation
of CCD Cameras. ISPRS Symposium Com. V. Close Range Photogrammetry meets
Machine Vision, Zürich, Proc. SPIE 1395, pp. 119 - 126.
BOPP, H., KRAUS, H. 1978: Ein Orientierungs- und Kalibrierungsverfahren für nichttopo-
graphische Anwendungen der Photogrammetrie, Allgemeine Vermessungs Nachrichten
(AVN) 5/87, pp. 182 - 188.
BROWN, D. C. 1966: Decentering distortion of lenses. Photogrammetric Engeneering
1966, pp. 444 - 462.
BROWN, D. C. 1976: The Bundle Adjustment - Progress and Prospectives, International
Archives of Photogrammetry 21(III), paper 303041, Helsinki
BROWN, D.C., 1982: STARS. A turnkey system for close range photogrammetry.
International Archives of Photogrammetry, 24(V/1), 1982.
CONRADY, A. 1919: Decentered Lens Systems. Royal Astronomical Society. Monthly
Notices. Vol. 79, 1919, pp. 384-390.
DOLD, J. 1994: Photogrammetrie in: Vermessungsverfahren im Maschinen- und
Anlagenbau, Hrsg. W. Schwarz, Schriftenreihe des Deutschen Vereins für
Vermessungswesen DVW, im Druck (1994)
FRASER, C., SHORTIS, M. 1992: Variation of Distortion within the Photographic Field.
Photogrammetric Engeneering and Remote Sensing Vol. 58 1992/6, pp. 851-855.
FRYER, J., BROWN, D. C. 1986: Lense Distortion for Close-Range Photogrammetry
Photogrammetric Engeneering and Remote Sensing Vol. 52 1986/1, pp. 51-58.
FRYER, J. 1989: Camera Calibration in Non Topographic Photogrammetry. in: Handbook
of Non Topographic Photogrammetry, American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote
Sensing, 2. Auflage, pp. 51 - 69.
GODDING, R., LUHMANN, T. 1992: Calibration and Accuracy Assessment of a Multi-
Sensor Online- Photogrammetric System, International Archives of Photogrammetry and
Remote Sensing, Com. V, Vol. XXIX, pp. 24 - 29, 17. ISPRS Kongress Washington 1992.
GODDING, R. 1993: Ein photogrammetrisches Verfahren zur Überprüfung und
Kalibrierung digitaler Bildaufnahmesysteme. Zeitschrift für Photogrammetrie und
Fernerkundung, 2/93, pp. 82 - 90.
GERDES, R. OTTERBACH,R., KAMMÜLLER, R. 1993: Kalibrierung eines digitalen
Bildverarbeitungssystems mit CCD-Kamera. Technisches Messen 60 1993/6, pp. 256 -
261

18
HINSKEN L., 1989: CAP: Ein Programm zur kombinierten Bündelausgleichung auf
Personal-Computern. Bildmessung und Luftbildwesen 57, 1989.
HOLDORF, M. 1993: Höchstauflösende digitale Aufnahmesysteme mit Réseau Scanning
und Line Scan Kameras. Symposium Bildverarbeitung '93, Technische Akademie
Esslingen, pp. 45 -51.
KAGER, H. 1989: Orient: A Universal Photogrammetric Adjustment System. Optical 3D-
Measurement Techniques 1989, Wichmann Verlag, pp. 447-455.
KRUCK, E. 1984: BINGO: Ein Bündelprogramm zur Simultanausgleichung für Ingenieur-
anwendungen - Möglichkeiten und praktische Ergebnisse. International Archives of
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 25(AS), 1984.
LENZ, R. 1987: Linsenfehlerkorrigierte Eichung von Halbleiterkameras mit
Standardobjektiven für hochgenaue 3D-Messungen in Echtzeit. Informatik Fachberichte
149, 9. DAGM-Symposium Braunschweig, pp. 212-216
LENZ, R, 1988: Zur Genauigkeit der Videometrie mit CCD- Sensoren. Informatik Fachbe-
richte 180. 10. DAGM-Symposium Zürich, pp. 179-189.
LENZ, R., LENZ, U. 1990: Calibration of a color CCD camera with 3000*2300 picture ele-
ments. ISPRS Symposium Com. V. Close Range Photogrammetry meets Machine Vision,
Zürich, Proc. SPIE 1395, pp. 104 - 111.
LENZ, R., LENZ, U. 1993 New developments in high resolution image acquisition with
CCD area sensors, Optical 3D Measurement Techniques II, Wichmann Verlag, Karlsruhe
1993, pp. 53 - 62.
POITZ, H., 1993: Die UMK SCAN von Carl Zeiss Jena, ein neues System für die digitale
Industrie-Photogrammetrie. Tagungsband zur DGPF- Jahrestagung 1992 in Jena, DGPF,
Berlin 1993.
RICHTER, U. 1993: Hardwarekomponenten für die Bildaufnahme mit höchster örtlicher
Auflösung. Tagungsband zur DGPF- Jahrestagung 1992 in Jena, DGPF, Berlin 1993.
RIECHMANN, W. 1992: Hochgenaue photogrammetrische on-line Objekterfassung.
Dissertation Braunschweig, 1993
RÜGER, PIETSCHNER, REGENSBURGER 1978: Photogrammetrie - Verfahren und Ge-
räte. VEB Verlag für Bauwesen, Berlin 1978.
STRUTZ, T. 1993 Ein genaues aktives optisches Triangulationsverfahren zur
Oberflächenvermessung. Dissertation TU Magdeburg, 1993.
WESTER- EBBINGHAUS, W. 1980: Photographisch-numerische Bestimmung der
geometrischen Abbildungseigenschaften eines optischen Systems. Optik 3/1980, pp.
253-259.
WESTER- EBBINGHAUS, W. 1985a: Bündeltriangulation mit gemeinsamer Ausgleichung
photogrammetrischer und geodätischer Beobachtungen. Zeitschrift für
Vermessungswesen 3/1985, pp. 101 - 111.
WESTER- EBBINGHAUS, W. 1985b: Verfahren zur Feldkalibrierung von photogramme-
trischen Aufnahmekammern im Nahbereich, DGK Reihe B, Heft Nr. 275, pp. 106 - 114.
WESTER- EBBINGHAUS, W. 1989: Mehrbild-Photogrammetrie - Räumliche Triangula-
tion mit Richtungsbündeln. Symposium Bildverarbeitung '89 Technische Akademie Esslin-
gen. pp. 25.1- 25.13

19