- T 
The condition numbers in table 1 confirm the results from 
chapter 4, On the other hand, although the correlation values 
for testfield 1 are already very high (see /1/, table 4), the 
condition numbers are nevertheless acceptable. 
From now on we compute condition numbers and correlation values 
with the complete set of informations ; i. e. the equations of 
type 3 in chapter 3 for the orientation angles will be added 
to the design matrix A of table 2 in /1/. The results are shown 
in tabel 2.1 - 2.5. From obvious reasons it is of essential 
importance for a calibration procedure to produce the set of 
calibration data with as little correlation to the rest of 
parameters (not realy wanted) as possible. Therefore, in the 
tables only these critical values are shown. Whether the other 
correltion values are high or not can be estimated from the 
condition number. Examining tables 2.1 - 2.5 the following 
characteristics may be evaluated: 
- Introducing the readings of orientation angles strengthens 
the mathematical model coneiderably: the condition numbers 
are improved and the generell correlation level is lowered 
(see tabel 1, 2.1 - 2.3 and in /1/ table 4). 
- Condition numbers and correlation values do not differ very 
much in all three testfields. Both sets of values improve 
from testfield 1 to 3 but not considerably. So, even a test- 
field consisting of only one row of points is sufficient for 
a complite camera calibration. 
6. CONCLUSION 
As a final consequence the here proposed and with some tests 
investigated camera calibration method turns out to be numeri- 
cally stable and capable of a reliable evaluation of the wanted 
calibration data. Since in the extreme case only one row of 
terrestrial points have to be targetted and geodetically 
measured this method is economic and efficient as well.