-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 894
Fix 35mm conversion #1106
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
YanNoun
wants to merge
1
commit into
mapillary:main
Choose a base branch
from
YanNoun:fix-35mm-conversion
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+43
−3
Open
Fix 35mm conversion #1106
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The wikipedia article mentions a definition that works for any aspect ratio in the "Calculation" section
Should we use that instead so that we support any aspect ratio rather than picking between these two?
I guess the question is which definition do camera manufacturers use to fill the EXIF tag.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, but in the end, everywhere else in the code, we use a ratio of focal / width (and not focal / diagonal), so we'll have to specify this width anyway.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You have made a valid observation. Thank you for bringing this up. However, imho the focal length conversion should be based on diagonal sensor size in order to correctly and transparently support all aspect ratios and sensor dimensions. I would suggest for your PR to focus on propagating this aspect though the rest of the code rather than trying to revert it or add separate code paths for each aspect ratio.
Although it is not explicitly specified in the Exif spec, afaik they assume diagonal equivalency, exactly due to different sensor aspect ratios. I have tried to address this in #599.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also do not see much reason for the
is_32andis_43variables, unless something eludes me. If you are trying to determine the image orientation then test for theOrientationorPixelXDimension/PixelYDimensionExif tags. If these are not present then it is safe to assume that width ≥ height by standard definition. Again, unless an image has been deliberately cropped into an unusual aspect ratio than the original image or the sensor has non-square pixels. But, these are obscure cases.