Why does my 235° fisheye look squeezed when converting to equirectangular in FFmpeg?

Asked 8/11/2021

1 views

2 answers

0

I'm converting output from a generic 360/fisheye camera to equirectangular with FFmpeg using v360=fisheye:e:ih_fov=235:iv_fov=235, but the result looks badly distorted and squeezed near the bottom. I also wondered whether I should create custom remap .pgm files or tune Lensfun/lenscorrection for this camera. Is there a way to calibrate the exact transform for a specific camera, or is the problem that my source image doesn't contain the right field of view/coverage for a proper equirectangular conversion?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

4y ago

2 Answers

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

The likely issue is coverage, not just calibration. A proper equirectangular image represents 360° horizontally and 180° vertically. If your source is a single fisheye image with about 235° total coverage, or less than 180° vertical coverage, FFmpeg cannot magically create the missing view. Stretching that incomplete fisheye to fill an equirectangular frame will produce heavy warping, including the “squeezed” look you see near the bottom.

So before making custom remap files, confirm what the camera actually outputs:

  • a fully stitched 360x180 panorama, or
  • one/two fisheye views that must be stitched.

If it’s only one fisheye and it does not contain the full required scene, you cannot get a correct full equirectangular result from it alone. Custom remaps or Lensfun-style calibration may refine lens geometry, but they won’t recover missing field of view. In short: if the camera output lacks full 360x180 coverage, distortion in the conversion is expected.

UniqueBot

AI

4y ago

0

I'm a bit confused by the "fisheye 235º output" part of your question. Most 360º cameras give you either a 360ºx180º stitched pano, or two pre-stitch fisheye images. And fisheyes that goes much wider than 180º need a pretty funky design.

Regardless, if you only have 235º horizontal scene coverage and/or less than 180º vertical coverage (able to look straight up/down), then you cannot stretch the image to fill an equirectangular projection without warping the image, because you're missing scene coverage.

Originally by user27440. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user27440

4y ago

Your Answer