jually spaced 10 mm 
ery 20 x 20 mm 
qually spaced 1 mm 
n fig. 4; the altar to 
for 3 of the sides of 
The distances were 
und the altar which 
size of the projector 
ut was 400 mm. We 
rizontal base parallel 
and of the projector 
ter photogram scale, 
ce, would have been 
rated, on the altar, by 
roximately 2 cm. As 
e relief of the altar is 
| visible; it is also 
the points' visibility 
|! the smallest side of 
iase, which has only 
le the mesh. For this 
'€ necessary. Actually 
/0 cameras positioned 
while the position of 
tar. In fact, adhesive 
side of the altar: these 
ographic network and 
e model and to relate 
to the same reference 
ohotograms made it 
e points which were 
ement used. 
RAM 
oduced by the golden 
only partially solved. 
ade in order to reduce 
> with films of varying 
d, generally with a 
es varying from 3 to 6 
at night because the 
1e film was assured to 
nd to exhibit some 
a 1996 
  
Planmetric Arrangement 
EAST SIDE 
  
  
forced centering 
  
projector 
| 
  
camera 
N 
| 
camera 
Y 
  
  
  
  
distance 2.60 m 
Co 
© 
distance |2. m 
  
  
ts 
  
  
  
distance 2.30 |m 
  
  
BJIO9UIBO 
J 
| 
podus, uo 
10322f od 
400 400 
\ 
  
ALTAR 
camera 
SN 
projector 
on tripod 
400 400 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
BIQUIBO 
  
  
  
  
  
  
camera 
  
  
2,60 m 
  
  
  
distance 
  
  
  
  
camera 
  
meiner’ 
projector 
on tripod 
1,00 m 
  
camera 
  
  
Figure 4 Plan for exposure 
S. RESTITUTION 
The software required for relative orientation and for the 
creation of the model for the projected points writes the 
collinearity equations, in the case of a normal exposure, 
relative to the camera and to the camera/projector. 
In particular the first line is defined by the 2D coordinates of 
each projected point image on the raster-photogram and by the 
nodal point of the camera; whereas the second line is defined 
by the same point on the pseudo-photogram and by the nodal 
point of the camera projector. 
25 
The program includes an implicit correction to the projector 
position (relative orientation) which is assumed to be slightly 
different from the theoretical one. In this way only the relative 
position of projector to camera is corrected. 
The algorithm for relative orientation calculates the projector 
rototranslation which minimises the sum of the square 
distances of the collinearity equations for each point of the 
projected mesh. 
When the optimal projector rototransaltion has been evaluated 
the 3D final coordinates are calculated by interpolation. 
A short analysis was performed of the errors caused by the 
lenses' distortion. Two diffferent approaches were followed; an 
International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Vol. XXXI, Part B5. Vienna 1996