In: Wagner W., Szkely, B. (eds.

): ISPRS TC VII Symposium 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 57, 2010, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B
Contents

Author Index

Keyword Index

SELF CALIBRATION OF SMALL AND MEDIUM FORMAT DIGITAL CAMERAS

Donald Moea, Aparajithan Sampatha, Jon Christophersona, Mike Bensonb
a

SGT, Inc1, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, SD
57198 USA (dmoe, asampath, jonchris)@usgs.gov
b
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198
USA [email protected]

KEY WORDS: Photogrammetry, Rectification, Bundle, Camera, Geometric.

ABSTRACT:
The knowledge of a cameras interior orientation parameters are a prerequisite for the camera to be used in any precision
photogrammetric project. Historically, the interior orientation parameters have been determined by analyzing the measured ground
3D coordinates of photo-identifiable targets, and their 2D (image) coordinates from multiple images of these targets. Camera self
calibration, on the other hand, uses targets on a scene that have not been measured before. In this research, we will briefly discuss
existing self calibration techniques, and present two methods for camera self calibration that are being used at the U.S. Geological
Surveys Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Data Center. The first method, developed by Pictometry (augmented by
Dr C.S. Fraser), uses a series of coded targets on a cage. The coded targets form different patterns that are imaged from nine different
locations with differing camera orientations. A free network solution using collinearity equations is used to determine the calibration
parameters. The coded targets are placed on the cage in three different planes, which allows for a robust calibration procedure. The
USGS/EROS has developed an inexpensive method for calibration, particularly for calibrating short focal length cameras. In this
case, the coded targets are pasted on a small prototype box and imaged from different locations and camera orientations. The design
of the box is discussed, and the results of the box and the cage calibrations are compared and analyzed.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Camera calibration procedure aims to completely characterize
the path of a ray of light that enters a camera, at the time of
exposure. The parameters that are used for this characterization
are termed the interior orientation parameters. The main
parameters are the focal length of the lens and the location of
the principal point of symmetry. However, for photogrammetric
purposes, the knowledge of the deviation of the light ray from a
straight line, described by polynomial coefficients, is also
important. This deviation is termed lens distortion, and the
polynomial coefficients are termed lens distortion parameters.
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has the
responsibility for camera calibration in the United States (Lee,
2004). In this research, we shall present two methods used by
the USGS to determine these parameters for small and medium
format digital cameras. The first method, developed by
Pictometry(augmented by Dr C.S. Fraser), uses a series of
coded targets on a cage. The coded targets are placed on the
cage in three different planes, which allows for a robust
calibration procedure. The second method describes the
development of a method whereby the coded targets are pasted
on a small prototype box. The importance of calibrating a
camera used for photogrammetric purposes cannot be
overstated. While it is possible to obtain accurate orthoproducts without a well calibrated camera, these would require
a very dense network of control points. Such a network will
make a photogrammetric project prohibitively expensive.

Symbol

Description

Gaussian focal length

K1, K2, K 3

Parameters for radial

distortion

P1, P2

Parameters for decentering

distortion

B1, B2

Differential scale distortion

(for digital cameras)

xp, y p

Position of the principal

point of symmetry with
respect to the array pixel
frame.

Table 1. List of interior orientation parameters

1.2 Camera calibration methods
There are many approaches to camera calibration. With the
increasing popularity of the field of Computer Vision as an area
of research, the methods have increased. Camera calibration
methods preferred by photogrammetrists can be categorized
broadly into three classes.

Work performed under U.S. Geological Survey contract 08HQCN0005

395

In: Wagner W., Szkely, B. (eds.): ISPRS TC VII Symposium 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 57, 2010, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B
Contents
Author Index
Keyword Index

2. CALIBRATION METHODOLOGY

1.2.1 In-situ calibration: The in-situ methods of calibration

are purported to produce the best camera calibration results.
They are mostly used for calibrating large cameras that cannot
be easily calibrated in laboratories. The cameras are hence
calibrated while they are in operation. In-situ calibration
methods require an area (a calibration range) with a very dense
distribution of highly accurate control points. While
maintaining a high density, the control points in the calibration
range should be well distributed in the horizontal, as well as in
the vertical direction. A rigorous least squares block adjustment
based on the co-linearity equations, augmented by equations
modelling radial and decentring distortion (Eq. 5) can generate
accurate calibration parameters. The in-situ method requires
aerial imagery over a calibration range. Also, careful
maintenance of the calibration range is required, over the years.
The maintenance may include re-survey of the control points,
making sure they are undisturbed etc. All these factors can be
expensive and time consuming for the camera operators.

2.1 Theoretical basis

The self calibration procedure described in this research is
based on the least squares solution to the photogrammetric
resection problem. The well known projective collinearity
equations form the basis for the mathematical model.
x xp

m11(X Xc ) m12 (Y Yc ) m13 ( Z Zc )

m31(X Xc ) m32 (Y Yc ) m33 (Z Zc )

(1)
y yp

m21(X Xc ) m22 (Y Yc ) m23 ( Z Zc )

m31(X Xc ) m32 (Y Yc ) m33 ( Z Zc )

In Eq. 1, (x ,y) are the measured image coordinates of a feature

and ( x p , y p ) are the location of the principle point of the lens,
in the image coordinate system, f refers to the focal length and
m11 m12
m 21 m 22
m31 m32

1.2.2 Precision multi-collimator instruments: The USGS

operates a multi-collimator calibration instrument located at
Reston, Virginia, USA (Light, 1992). The instrument is used to
calibrate film based cameras, and while digital cameras are
increasingly used, there are a number of photogrammetric
companies that still employ film cameras. The aerial camera is
placed on top of the collimator bank, aligned and focused at
infinity. Images that capture the precision targets located in
telescopes lens (of the multi-collimator) are taken. The
deviation of the measured image (x,y) coordinates from the
known (X,Y) coordinates forms the basis for solving for the
calibration parameters (Eq. 5).

m13
m 23
m33

is the camera orientation matrix. Since the lens

in the camera is a complex system consisting of a series of

lenses, the path of light is not always rectilinear. The result is
that a straight line in object space is not imaged as one in the
image. The effect is termed distortion. Primarily, we are
interested in characterizing the radial distortion and de-centring
distortion. Radial distortion displaces the image points along
the radial direction from the principal point (Mugnier et al.,
2004). The distortion is also symmetric around the principal
point. The distortion is defined by a polynomial (Brown, 1966;
Light, 1992).

1.2.3 Self calibration: Self calibration uses the information

present in images taken from an un-calibrated camera to
determine its calibration parameters (Fraser, 1997; Fraser 2001;
Remendino and Fraser, 2006; Strum, 1998). Methods of self
calibration include generating Kruppa equations (Faugeras et.
al., 1992), enforcing linear constraints on calibration matrix
(Hartley, 1994), a method that determines the absolute quadric,
which is the image of the cone at a plane at infinity (Triggs.
While there are many techniques employed by researchers
(Hartley, 1994; Faugeras et al., 1992), most of these do not find
solutions for distortion and principal point, as they are not
considered critical for Computer Vision. On the other hand, for
photogrammetrists, these are critical parameters necessary to
produce an accurate product at a reasonable price.

r
r

k1r 3

k 2r 5

(x

ki , i

xp )

k 3r 7
(y

...

yp )2

(2)

1,2,3...are coefficien ts of the polynomial

The (x,y) components of the radial distortion are given by:

In this study, we will use self calibration techniques to

determine camera calibration parameters. Section 2 provides a
brief theoretical framework for calibration. It goes on to discuss
the design of two methods for self calibration used at the USGS,
and describes the experimental set-up. It introduces an
inexpensive method for calibrating small and medium format
digital cameras, with short focal length. Section 3 analyses the
results of calibration, and compares the results obtained from
the two methods described in Section 2. Section 4 presents the
conclusions and discusses future work.

x 1
y 1

r
r
r
y
r
x

(3)

The second type of distortion is the decentring distortion. This

is due to the displacement of the principle point from the centre
of the lens system. The distortion has both radial and tangential
components, and is asymmetric with respect to the principal
point (Mugnier et al., 2004). The components of de-centring
distortion, in the x-y direction are given by

396

In: Wagner W., Szkely, B. (eds.): ISPRS TC VII Symposium 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 57, 2010, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B
Contents
Author Index
Keyword Index

EDC CAL/VAL LAB SIZE

P1 (r

2x ) 2P2 xy

y 2 2P1xy P2 (r 2

30 FEET WIDE

(4)

2y 2 )

Far Wall

14 FEET WIDE

CEILING
HEIGHT
ON
OUTSIDE
RING
10 FT, 7 IN

54 FEET LONG

A third distortion element, specific to digital cameras

accounting for scale distortion of pixel sizes in the x and y
direction is also incorporated

x 3

(5)

B1x B2 y

CEILING
HEIGHT
INSIDE
CENTER BOX
12 FT, 9 IN

Control
Point Cage
12Wx10Hx8
D ft

70 FEET LONG

x 2

25.9 ft,
30 degs
Offset

at 30
deg at
30
33.4deg
ft,

The final mathematical model is a result of adding Eqs. 3 and 4

and 5 to the right hand side of Eq.

24 degs
Offset
8 FT

8 FT

x xp

m11 (X X c ) m12 (Y Yc ) m13 ( Z Zc )

m31 (X X c ) m32 (Y Yc ) m33 ( Z Zc )

x1 x 2 x 3

y yp

m 21 (X X c ) m 22 (Y Yc ) m 23 ( Z Zc )
m31 (X X c ) m32 (Y Yc ) m33 ( Z Zc )

y1 y 2

Corridor Wall

(6)

DOUBLE
DOOR

Figure 1. Layout of the calibration lab and the calibration cage

2.2 Experimental set-up for cage based self calibration

The camera calibration facility is located at the USGSs Earth
Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Data Center in
Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Fig. 1 shows the position of the
calibration cage, with respect to the room. Also shown are some
of the positions for locating the cameras. The cage consists of
three parallel panels. Each panel has a number of circular retroreflective targets (dots), and a few coded targets (Fig 2a). The
coded targets are so referred because the pattern of the
placement of the individual circular dots that make up these
targets is unique (Fig. 2b). Each coded target has five dots that
are positioned in the same relative orientation as the red lines
shown in Fig. 2(b). The intersection of the red lines is taken as
the centre of the coded target.

(a) 3D Calibration cage

For the calibration procedure, the camera lens is always

focussed at infinity. The choice of the distance of the camera
from the front panel of the cage depends on the focal length of
the camera, and the depth of focus that has been selected. Once
the camera-cage distance is fixed, three angular positions from
the centre of the front panel of the cage are selected. The
angular positions are selected keeping in mind the optimal
angles for convergent photography, and the limitations imposed
by the dimensions of the calibration room. Ideally, the angular
positions will be close to what is shown in Fig 1. Once the
images are captured, they are processed using software called
Australis (Fraser, 2001). Australis uses a free network method
of bundle adjustment. It recognizes the patterns in the coded
targets and calculates their centre.

Coded
target
centre

(b) Coded target

(c) Circular target

Figure 2. (a) Image of the calibration cage, with three panels (b)
the pattern in a coded target and (c) the individual circular
target

397

In: Wagner W., Szkely, B. (eds.): ISPRS TC VII Symposium 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 57, 2010, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B
Contents
Author Index
Keyword Index

The coded target centre is not the actual centroid of the

individual target dots, but determined in a manner shown in Fig.
2(b). The software requires at least four coded targets in each
image that are common with other images. It uses the targets to
determine the initial relative orientation of the camera at all the
exposure stations. It then uses the circular targets to determine a
free network least squares bundle adjustment solution of Eq. 5.
Since it is a free network solution, the least squares iteration
converges easily, and a relative measure of the geometry of the
system (the lens, camera, and the targets) is obtained.

The box is designed such that its dimensions are approximately

24 inches at the top (outer edge) and 12 inches at the bottom
(inner). The inner walls of the box are not vertical, but are
sloping at approximately 30 degrees. A scaled down series of
coded targets are pasted on all the interior surfaces of the box.
The design takes advantage of the simplicity of the free network
bundle adjustment solution that requires no outside control
structure.

Figure 5. Camera exposure stations for box based calibration

For calibration photography, the optic axis of the camera is
usually kept parallel to the inclined interior walls of the box.
Three images are obtained from each side, and one image is
obtained from each of the four corners, which results in a total
of sixteen images. The images are alternatively taken in portrait
and landscape modes. For a stable solution, as many targets as
possible are obtained from the corners of the camera lens.

Figure 3. Camera orientations for the nine convergent image

exposure stations
2.3 Camera self calibration using a box
With the ever increasing use of digital photography for aerial
mapping, the USGS receives many requests to calibrate cameras
that are not traditionally used for photogrammetric mapping.
Some of these cameras are short focal length small format
commercial cameras, (used perhaps from unmanned aerial
vehicles, etc.) To handle these requests, the USGS has
developed a self calibration procedure that does not require
establishing a large calibration cage. Instead, a smaller rigid box
that can be easily designed and constructed is used. The current
design of the box is as shown in Fig. 4.

3. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

A Nikon D1x digital single lens reflex (SLR) camera with a
20mm focal length lens (Nikkon AF) was used for this research.
F # of 8 was chosen for calibrating with the cage as target, and f
# of 22 was chosen for calibrating with the box as the target.
The optimal hyperfocal distances for the F# (depth of focus)
were calculated using Eq. 6:

Hp

f2
F# c

(6)

where f is the focal length, and c is the circle of confusion and

is approximately 0.072 mm. The hyperfocal distance for the
cage was 2.3 ft and for the box was ~ 1ft.
3.1 Results
Since the hyperfocal distance to the front panel of the cage was
only 2.4 ft, it was very difficult to cover the entire cage, and the
circular and coded targets. To ensure a more complete coverage,
it was decided to take more than the standard set of nine images
for calibration. A total of 15 images were used in Australis. The
free network bundle adjustment solution is graphically
displayed in Fig 7 (a). In a similar manner, the hyperfocal
distance for the calibration using the box was calculated at 1 ft.
A total of 20 images were obtained for the box. The free
network solution is graphically shown in Figure 7 (b). The

Figure 4. A rigid box design for calibration of small format

cameras

398

In: Wagner W., Szkely, B. (eds.): ISPRS TC VII Symposium 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 57, 2010, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B
Contents

Author Index

green dots in Fig. 6 represents a circular target (Fig 2c), while

the orange lines represent the coded target patterns (Fig. 2b).

Keyword Index

Table 2 shows the solutions to the bundle adjustment and the

calibration parameters obtained from the two experiments.
Table 2 lists the calibration parameters that were obtained as a
part of the bundle adjustment solution

(a)
(a)

(b)
Figure 7. Radial distortion plots showing the distortion (Y-axis,
m) as a function of distance (X-axis, mm) from the principal
point for results of camera calibration obtained from (a) Cage
and (b) Box. The plots are obtained from Australis software
(b)
Figure 6. Graphical representation of the bundle adjustment
solution for (a) Cage and (b) Box based camera calibration
.
Calibration
parameters

Calculated
values from
cage

Calculated
values from
box

Focal length

20.601

20.603

xp

0.056 mm

0.064 mm

yp

-0.020 mm

-0.019mm

K1

2.781e-004

2.74196e-004

K2

-4.996e-007

-4.1747e-007

K3

9.139e-011

-1.5359e-011

De-centring
distortion
coefficients

P1

-6.173e-007

2.989e-007

P2

8.341e-006

2.637e-005

(b)

Scaling
elements

B1

8.1521e-005

1.5082e-005

B2

-1.0153e-005

9.6088e-006

Figure 8. Decentring distortion plots showing distortion (Yaxis, m), against radial distance (X-axis, mm) for results of
camera calibration obtained from (a) Cage and (b) Box. The
plots are obtained from Australis software

Principle
point location
Radial
distortion
coefficients

(a)

Table 2 Camera calibration parameters

399

In: Wagner W., Szkely, B. (eds.): ISPRS TC VII Symposium 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 57, 2010, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B
Contents

Author Index

Keyword Index

views. In Applications of Invariance in Computer Vision,

Mundy, Zisserman and Forsyth (eds.), Lecture Notes in
computer Science, Vol. 825, Springer-Verlag, pp. 237-256

3.2 Analysis
The results of the two calibration procedures indicate that the
parameters are close to being identical (Table 2). The charts in
Fig. 7 also show the same phenomena. However, in our
experiments, we found that the results start varying if the
camera is positioned too close to the targets. This observation
seems consistent with previously reported studies on close
range photogrammetric camera calibration (Brown, 1971).
However, more analysis needs to be done for anything
conclusive. Since the Box as a calibration target is meant for
small format short focal length cameras, the distance between
the targets and the cameras should be close enough so that
Australis software is able to recognize the targets. The size of
the targets, therefore, needs to be selected accordingly.

Remondino, F., Fraser, C.S., 2006. Digital camera calibration

methods: considerations and comparisons. IAPRS volume
XXXVI, part 5, Dresden 25-27 September 2006
Lee, G.Y.G. ,2004. Camera calibration program in the United
States: past, present and future. In Post-Launch Calibration of
Satellite Sensors, ISPRS Book Series, Vol. 2, A.A. Balkema
Publishers, New York.
Light, D.L.,1992. The new camera calibration system at the
U.S.Geological Survey. Photogrammetric Engineering and
Remote Sensing, 58(2):185188.
Mugnier, C.J., Forstner, W., Wrober, B., Padres, F., Munjy, R.,
2004. The mathematics of photogrammetry. In Manual of
Photogrammetry, Fifth edition. Pp. 181-316.

4. CONCLUSIONS
In this research, two methods of camera calibration that are used
at the USGS EROS at Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA were
presented. The camera calibration lab is housed primarily to
calibrate medium format digital cameras, with a focal length
range between 20-120mm. The main calibration method uses
the principles of self calibration and bundle adjustment on
coded targets located on an aluminium cage. A second method
to perform calibration was presented. This method used a scaled
down version of the coded targets pasted on a small rigid box.
Both the methods involve taking images of the targets from
different camera locations and orientations. The solution to the
bundle adjustment problem is obtained using the software
Australis. It was shown that the solutions camera calibration
parameters obtained from both the methods are close to each
other. The same time the approach using the box yields
promising results and can be used for verification of the
calibration parameters. Further research on the box by adding
more targets may yield results closer to the results obtained
from the cage. There has been an increasing interest in
calibrating longer focal length cameras (> 150mm) using self
calibration methods. The problem becomes non trivial given the
limitations of space. Further research is being conducted at the
USGS on expanding the range of cameras, with regards to the
focal length, that can be calibrated in the lab.

Strum., P., 1998. A case against Kruppas equations for camera

self-calibration. IEEE International conference on image
processing, Chicago, Illinois, pp. 172-175.
Triggs, B., 1997. Autocalibration and the absolute
quadric,CVPR, pages 609614, Puerto Rico, June 1997.

DISCLAIMER
Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive
purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
Government.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Sam Johnson and Alonso Holmes performed most of the camera
calibration experiments
.

References:
Brown, D.C., 1996. Decentering distortion of lenses.
Photogrammetric Engineering, 32(3):444 462.
Brown, D.C., 1996. Close-range camera calibration.
Photogrammetric Engineering, 37(8):855 866, August 1971
Faugeras, O., Luong, Q.T. and Maybank, S., 1992. Camera
selfcalibration: Theory and experiments. ECCV'92, Lecture
Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 588, Springer-Verlag, pp.
321-334
Fraser, C.S., 1997. Digital camera self-calibration. ISPRS
Journal of Photogrammetry & Remote Sensing 52, pp. 149
159, 1997.
Fraser, C.S., 2001. Australis: software for close-range digital
photogrammetry users manual.
Hartley, R., 1994: Euclidean reconstruction from uncalibrated

400