Core dump: Assertion `p.first != p.second' failed. about bundler_sfm HOT 11 OPEN

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:38 AM Alberto Mardegan ***@***.***> wrote: I'm running bundler on a set of photos with no focal length information. I first ran into a problem because the image resolution was too high (5312x3984 pixels) for sift to handle, so I downscaled them all to half their size. *Incidentally, if someone has a link to the sift source code, please share it*: I want to rebuild it with this limitation lifted, and also make a 64bit version of it. Anyway, according to FAQ item 1, I first ran the bundler.py script with the --extract-focal parameter to obtain the list.txt file, and there I extended each line with " 0 3187". This is probably not the real focal length, just a quick estimate (I've read that a reasonable estimation for the focal length is max(width, height) * 1.2). Then I ran the bundler.py script again (with no options), so that it could compute the matches, and then I ran bundler list.txt --options_file options.txt and got this: [OnInit] Running program bundler Loading images from file 'list.txt' [BundlerApp::OnInit] Processing options... [BundlerApp::OnInit] Loading frame... [BundlerApp::OnInit] Loading images... [ReadGeometricConstraints] Reading 0 tracks [ReadGeometricConstraints] Reading tracks took 0.000s [ReadTrackPairs] Read 0 track pairs Avg. proj error [0 projections] = -nan [BundleAdjust] Error: no good camera pairs found! [BundleAdjust] Trying a backup approach... [BundleAdjust] Error: no good camera pairs found! [BundleAdjust] Picking first two cameras... [BundleAdjust] Adjusting cameras 0 and 1 (score = 0.000) [GetJPEGDimensions] File ./image20170205_134820745.jpg: ( 2656 , 1992 ) [GetJPEGDimensions] File ./image20170205_134551277.jpg: ( 2656 , 1992 ) [BaseApp::SetTracks] Setting tracks for image 0... [BaseApp::SetTracks] Finished in 0.000s [BaseApp::SetTracks] Setting tracks for image 1... [BaseApp::SetTracks] Finished in 0.000s bundler: BaseApp.h:271: std::vector<KeypointMatch>& MatchTable::GetMatchList(MatchIndex): Assertion `p.first != p.second' failed. Aborted (core dumped) Could it be because my focal length estimation was way off, or is there some other problem here? Also, when downscaling the photos, should the focal length be downscaled proportionally, or should itbe left untouched? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#46>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABt6q0MBbvfyh7gTTn38J6w_90PKE3mDks5ratBqgaJpZM4L72Fc> .

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 5:40 AM Alberto Mardegan ***@***.***> wrote: Hi Noah, thanks for your reply! So, I rebuilt bundler with siftfast, and adjusted the scripts to use it instead of sift. Now the feature detection works without the need of downscaling the images. However, I still get the same error when running Bundler. I've ran it from a clean directory (with only the images in), and no matches subdirectory was created (but maybe that's the way the bundler.py script works?); instead, there are these files: list.txt matches.corresp.txt matches.init.txt matches.prune.txt matches.ransac.txt nmatches.corresp.txt nmatches.prune.txt nmatches.ransac.txt options.txt pairwise_scores.txt They have data inside, but the matches.corresp.txt is a bit suspicious in that it contains just 1062 empty lines -- no other content at all. I'm attaching the bundle/out file, which is much bigger than the previous one: bundle.txt <https://github.com/snavely/bundler_sfm/files/769321/bundle.txt> Please let me know if you'd like to have a look at any of the files above, I'll attach them here. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#46 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABt6q6RUsObHOU1M669ZHwgMJhnXXpWzks5rbwvFgaJpZM4L72Fc> .

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 11:40 PM Alberto Mardegan ***@***.***> wrote: I'm using these images: https://github.com/rperrot/ReconstructionDataSet/tree/master/MirebeauStHilaireStatue I want to make a comparison among SfM software, so I'm trying the same dataset with bundler, mve, colmap, VisualSfM, openMVG, etc. This dataset seems to work fine with the other programs, so it's probably a matter of giving bundler the right options. Any hints will be very appreciated :-) — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#46 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABt6q-Yn01D8ZJN_w8DJ8bK9k0wxFaBiks5rcAj3gaJpZM4L72Fc> .

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:24 AM Alberto Mardegan ***@***.***> wrote: Did you use sift or siftfast? I've yet to verify how things work if I try to swap x and y in siftfast. Maybe that's the issue. I'll try tonight, and let you know. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#46 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABt6q8ZrNQaKfuw4fH40mo3VRFXaNImOks5rcWS3gaJpZM4L72Fc> .