Related
My code builds a model-view matrix by multiplying MV = V*T*R*S. See portion of code below (it uses WebGL in Dart language -- with some libraries). As far as I can tell, the code seems to work properly. However, in order to make the code function, I had to invert the model rotation matrix. Unfortunately I can't understand why the inversion of model rotation is required. Why wouldn't it work with the plain non-inverted model rotation matrix R' ?
Code:
// why is inversion of R' needed?
setRotationMatrix(_rotation, mf, mu, mr); // _rotation = R'
_rotation.invertRotation(); // _rotation = inverse_of(R') = R
camera.viewMatrix(MV); // MV = V (invert C into MV)
MV.translate(_center[0], _center[1], _center[2]); // MV = V*T
MV.multiply(_rotation); // MV = V*T*R
MV.scale(rescale, rescale, rescale); // MV = V*T*R*S
gl.uniformMatrix4fv(u_MV, false, MV.storage); // send MV uniform to GPU
Legend:
[4x4 Matrices]
C: Camera
V: View (Inverse of Camera)
T: Model Translation
R': Model Rotation
R: Inverse of Model Rotation (why is this inversion needed?)
S: Model Scaling
C = cf.x cf.y cf.z ct.x
cu.x cu.y cu.z ct.y
cr.x cr.y cr.z ct.z
0 0 0 1
cf = camera front vector
cu = camera up vector
cr = camera right vector
ct = camera translation vector
V = inverse_of(C)
R' = mf.x mf.y mf.z 0
mu.x mu.y mu.z 0
mr.x mr.y mr.z 0
0 0 0 1
mf = model front vector
mu = model up vector
mr = model right vector
R = inverse_of(R')
The R' matrix could be transposed which means that instead of the first 4 elements of the array representing the first column they represent the first row or vice versa.
With rotation matrices transposing is the same as inverting, so instead of inverting you could just do a transpose since that's much cheaper.
I don't see the implementation of the function that creates the R' matrix but the result of R' you pasted looks a bit odd to me: it corresponds (1,0,0) with the front vector not the right.
There's also the convention of multiplying the position vector from left or right in the shader which can also mean a change in transposing the matrices.
If you'd show an example url or more code this could be evaluated more precisely.
If you multiply two matrices.
M' = A * B;
Then it holds:
A = M' * B-1
MVP inverse matrix vector back again back to its original state.
V = PVM-1 * V'
It is important to understand the rule:
M * M-1 = 1 (Identity Matrix)
this is my situation: I have a 30x30 image and I want to calculate the radial and tangent component of the gradient of each point (pixel) along the straight line passing through the centre of the image (15,15) and the same (i,j) point.
[dx, dy] = gradient(img);
for i=1:30
for j=1:30
pt = [dx(i, j), dy(i,j)];
line = [i-15, j-15];
costh = dot(line, pt)/(norm(line)*norm(pt));
par(i,j) = norm(costh*line);
tang(i,j) = norm(sin(acos(costh))*line);
end
end
is this code correct?
I think there is a conceptual error in your code, I tried to get your results with a different approach, see how it compares to yours.
[dy, dx] = gradient(img);
I inverted x and y because the usual convention in matlab is to have the first dimension along the rows of a matrix while gradient does the opposite.
I created an array of the same size as img but with each pixel containing the angle of the vector from the center of the image to this point:
[I,J] = ind2sub(size(img), 1:numel(img));
theta=reshape(atan2d(I-ceil(size(img,1)/2), J-ceil(size(img,2)/2)), size(img))+180;
The function atan2d ensures that the 4 quadrants give distinct angle values.
Now the projection of the x and y components can be obtained with trigonometry:
par=dx.*sind(theta)+dy.*cosd(theta);
tang=dx.*cosd(theta)+dy.*sind(theta);
Note the use of the .* to achieve point-by-point multiplication, this is a big advantage of Matlab's matrix computations which saves you a loop.
Here's an example with a well-defined input image (no gradient along the rows and a constant gradient along the columns):
img=repmat(1:30, [30 1]);
The results:
subplot(1,2,1)
imagesc(par)
subplot(1,2,2)
imagesc(tang)
colorbar
I have two images which one of them is the Original image and the second one is Transformed image.
I have to find out how many degrees Transformed image was rotated using 3x3 transformation matrix. Plus, I need to find how far translated from origin.
Both images are grayscaled and held in matrix variables. Their sizes are same [350 500].
I have found a few lecture notes like this.
Lecture notes say that I should use the following matrix formula for rotation:
For translation matrix the formula is given:
Everything is good. But there are two problems:
I could not imagine how to implement the formulas using MATLAB.
The formulas are shaped to find x',y' values but I already have got x,x',y,y' values. I need to find rotation angle (theta) and tx and ty.
I want to know the equivailence of x, x', y, y' in the the matrix.
I have got the following code:
rotationMatrix = [ cos(theta) sin(theta) 0 ; ...
-sin(theta) cos(theta) 0 ; ...
0 0 1];
translationMatrix = [ 1 0 tx; ...
0 1 ty; ...
0 0 1];
But as you can see, tx, ty, theta variables are not defined before used. How can I calculate theta, tx and ty?
PS: It is forbidden to use Image Processing Toolbox functions.
This is essentially a homography recovery problem. What you are doing is given co-ordinates in one image and the corresponding co-ordinates in the other image, you are trying to recover the combined translation and rotation matrix that was used to warp the points from the one image to the other.
You can essentially combine the rotation and translation into a single matrix by multiplying the two matrices together. Multiplying is simply compositing the two operations together. You would this get:
H = [cos(theta) -sin(theta) tx]
[sin(theta) cos(theta) ty]
[ 0 0 1]
The idea behind this is to find the parameters by minimizing the error through least squares between each pair of points.
Basically, what you want to find is the following relationship:
xi_after = H*xi_before
H is the combined rotation and translation matrix required to map the co-ordinates from the one image to the other. H is also a 3 x 3 matrix, and knowing that the lower right entry (row 3, column 3) is 1, it makes things easier. Also, assuming that your points are in the augmented co-ordinate system, we essentially want to find this relationship for each pair of co-ordinates from the first image (x_i, y_i) to the other (x_i', y_i'):
[p_i*x_i'] [h11 h12 h13] [x_i]
[p_i*y_i'] = [h21 h22 h23] * [y_i]
[ p_i ] [h31 h32 1 ] [ 1 ]
The scale of p_i is to account for homography scaling and vanishing points. Let's perform a matrix-vector multiplication of this equation. We can ignore the 3rd element as it isn't useful to us (for now):
p_i*x_i' = h11*x_i + h12*y_i + h13
p_i*y_i' = h21*x_i + h22*y_i + h23
Now let's take a look at the 3rd element. We know that p_i = h31*x_i + h32*y_i + 1. As such, substituting p_i into each of the equations, and rearranging to solve for x_i' and y_i', we thus get:
x_i' = h11*x_i + h12*y_i + h13 - h31*x_i*x_i' - h32*y_i*x_i'
y_i' = h21*x_i + h22*y_i + h23 - h31*x_i*y_i' - h32*y_i*y_i'
What you have here now are two equations for each unique pair of points. What we can do now is build an over-determined system of equations. Take each pair and build two equations out of them. You will then put it into matrix form, i.e.:
Ah = b
A would be a matrix of coefficients that were built from each set of equations using the co-ordinates from the first image, b would be each pair of points for the second image and h would be the parameters you are solving for. Ultimately, you are finally solving this linear system of equations reformulated in matrix form:
You would solve for the vector h which can be performed through least squares. In MATLAB, you can do this via:
h = A \ b;
A sidenote for you: If the movement between images is truly just a rotation and translation, then h31 and h32 will both be zero after we solve for the parameters. However, I always like to be thorough and so I will solve for h31 and h32 anyway.
NB: This method will only work if you have at least 4 unique pairs of points. Because there are 8 parameters to solve for, and there are 2 equations per point, A must have at least a rank of 8 in order for the system to be consistent (if you want to throw in some linear algebra terminology in the loop). You will not be able to solve this problem if you have less than 4 points.
If you want some MATLAB code, let's assume that your points are stored in sourcePoints and targetPoints. sourcePoints are from the first image and targetPoints are for the second image. Obviously, there should be the same number of points between both images. It is assumed that both sourcePoints and targetPoints are stored as M x 2 matrices. The first columns contain your x co-ordinates while the second columns contain your y co-ordinates.
numPoints = size(sourcePoints, 1);
%// Cast data to double to be sure
sourcePoints = double(sourcePoints);
targetPoints = double(targetPoints);
%//Extract relevant data
xSource = sourcePoints(:,1);
ySource = sourcePoints(:,2);
xTarget = targetPoints(:,1);
yTarget = targetPoints(:,2);
%//Create helper vectors
vec0 = zeros(numPoints, 1);
vec1 = ones(numPoints, 1);
xSourcexTarget = -xSource.*xTarget;
ySourcexTarget = -ySource.*xTarget;
xSourceyTarget = -xSource.*yTarget;
ySourceyTarget = -ySource.*yTarget;
%//Build matrix
A = [xSource ySource vec1 vec0 vec0 vec0 xSourcexTarget ySourcexTarget; ...
vec0 vec0 vec0 xSource ySource vec1 xSourceyTarget ySourceyTarget];
%//Build RHS vector
b = [xTarget; yTarget];
%//Solve homography by least squares
h = A \ b;
%// Reshape to a 3 x 3 matrix (optional)
%// Must transpose as reshape is performed
%// in column major format
h(9) = 1; %// Add in that h33 is 1 before we reshape
hmatrix = reshape(h, 3, 3)';
Once you are finished, you have a combined rotation and translation matrix. If you want the x and y translations, simply pick off column 3, rows 1 and 2 in hmatrix. However, we can also work with the vector of h itself, and so h13 would be element 3, and h23 would be element number 6. If you want the angle of rotation, simply take the appropriate inverse trigonometric function to rows 1, 2 and columns 1, 2. For the h vector, this would be elements 1, 2, 4 and 5. There will be a bit of inconsistency depending on which elements you choose as this was solved by least squares. One way to get a good overall angle would perhaps be to find the angles of all 4 elements then do some sort of average. Either way, this is a good starting point.
References
I learned about homography a while ago through Leow Wee Kheng's Computer Vision course. What I have told you is based on his slides: http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~cs4243/lecture/camera.pdf. Take a look at slides 30-32 if you want to know where I pulled this material from. However, the MATLAB code I wrote myself :)
I have two cartesian coordinate systems with known unit vectors:
System A(x_A,y_A,z_A)
and
System B(x_B,y_B,z_B)
Both systems share the same origin (0,0,0). I'm trying to calculate a quaternion, so that vectors in system B can be expressed in system A.
I am familiar with the mathematical concept of quaternions. I have already implemented the required math from here: http://content.gpwiki.org/index.php/OpenGL%3aTutorials%3aUsing_Quaternions_to_represent_rotation
One possible solution could be to calculate Euler angles and use them for 3 quaternions. Multiplying them would lead to a final one, so that I could transform my vectors:
v(A) = q*v(B)*q_conj
But this would incorporate Gimbal Lock again, which was the reason NOT to use Euler angles in the beginning.
Any idead how to solve this?
You can calculate the quaternion representing the best possible transformation from one coordinate system to another by the method described in this paper:
Paul J. Besl and Neil D. McKay
"Method for registration of 3-D shapes", Sensor Fusion IV: Control Paradigms and Data Structures, 586 (April 30, 1992); http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.57955
The paper is not open access but I can show you the Python implementation:
def get_quaternion(lst1,lst2,matchlist=None):
if not matchlist:
matchlist=range(len(lst1))
M=np.matrix([[0,0,0],[0,0,0],[0,0,0]])
for i,coord1 in enumerate(lst1):
x=np.matrix(np.outer(coord1,lst2[matchlist[i]]))
M=M+x
N11=float(M[0][:,0]+M[1][:,1]+M[2][:,2])
N22=float(M[0][:,0]-M[1][:,1]-M[2][:,2])
N33=float(-M[0][:,0]+M[1][:,1]-M[2][:,2])
N44=float(-M[0][:,0]-M[1][:,1]+M[2][:,2])
N12=float(M[1][:,2]-M[2][:,1])
N13=float(M[2][:,0]-M[0][:,2])
N14=float(M[0][:,1]-M[1][:,0])
N21=float(N12)
N23=float(M[0][:,1]+M[1][:,0])
N24=float(M[2][:,0]+M[0][:,2])
N31=float(N13)
N32=float(N23)
N34=float(M[1][:,2]+M[2][:,1])
N41=float(N14)
N42=float(N24)
N43=float(N34)
N=np.matrix([[N11,N12,N13,N14],\
[N21,N22,N23,N24],\
[N31,N32,N33,N34],\
[N41,N42,N43,N44]])
values,vectors=np.linalg.eig(N)
w=list(values)
mw=max(w)
quat= vectors[:,w.index(mw)]
quat=np.array(quat).reshape(-1,).tolist()
return quat
This function returns the quaternion that you were looking for. The arguments lst1 and lst2 are lists of numpy.arrays where every array represents a 3D vector. If both lists are of length 3 (and contain orthogonal unit vectors), the quaternion should be the exact transformation. If you provide longer lists, you get the quaternion that is minimizing the difference between both point sets.
The optional matchlist argument is used to tell the function which point of lst2 should be transformed to which point in lst1. If no matchlist is provided, the function assumes that the first point in lst1 should match the first point in lst2 and so forth...
A similar function for sets of 3 Points in C++ is the following:
#include <Eigen/Dense>
#include <Eigen/Geometry>
using namespace Eigen;
/// Determine rotation quaternion from coordinate system 1 (vectors
/// x1, y1, z1) to coordinate system 2 (vectors x2, y2, z2)
Quaterniond QuaternionRot(Vector3d x1, Vector3d y1, Vector3d z1,
Vector3d x2, Vector3d y2, Vector3d z2) {
Matrix3d M = x1*x2.transpose() + y1*y2.transpose() + z1*z2.transpose();
Matrix4d N;
N << M(0,0)+M(1,1)+M(2,2) ,M(1,2)-M(2,1) , M(2,0)-M(0,2) , M(0,1)-M(1,0),
M(1,2)-M(2,1) ,M(0,0)-M(1,1)-M(2,2) , M(0,1)+M(1,0) , M(2,0)+M(0,2),
M(2,0)-M(0,2) ,M(0,1)+M(1,0) ,-M(0,0)+M(1,1)-M(2,2) , M(1,2)+M(2,1),
M(0,1)-M(1,0) ,M(2,0)+M(0,2) , M(1,2)+M(2,1) ,-M(0,0)-M(1,1)+M(2,2);
EigenSolver<Matrix4d> N_es(N);
Vector4d::Index maxIndex;
N_es.eigenvalues().real().maxCoeff(&maxIndex);
Vector4d ev_max = N_es.eigenvectors().col(maxIndex).real();
Quaterniond quat(ev_max(0), ev_max(1), ev_max(2), ev_max(3));
quat.normalize();
return quat;
}
What language are you using? If c++, feel free to use my open source library:
http://sourceforge.net/p/transengine/code/HEAD/tree/transQuaternion/
The short of it is, you'll need to convert your vectors to quaternions, do your calculations, and then convert your quaternion to a transformation matrix.
Here's a code snippet:
Quaternion from vector:
cQuat nTrans::quatFromVec( Vec vec ) {
float angle = vec.v[3];
float s_angle = sin( angle / 2);
float c_angle = cos( angle / 2);
return (cQuat( c_angle, vec.v[0]*s_angle, vec.v[1]*s_angle,
vec.v[2]*s_angle )).normalized();
}
And for the matrix from quaternion:
Matrix nTrans::matFromQuat( cQuat q ) {
Matrix t;
q = q.normalized();
t.M[0][0] = ( 1 - (2*q.y*q.y + 2*q.z*q.z) );
t.M[0][1] = ( 2*q.x*q.y + 2*q.w*q.z);
t.M[0][2] = ( 2*q.x*q.z - 2*q.w*q.y);
t.M[0][3] = 0;
t.M[1][0] = ( 2*q.x*q.y - 2*q.w*q.z);
t.M[1][1] = ( 1 - (2*q.x*q.x + 2*q.z*q.z) );
t.M[1][2] = ( 2*q.y*q.z + 2*q.w*q.x);
t.M[1][3] = 0;
t.M[2][0] = ( 2*q.x*q.z + 2*q.w*q.y);
t.M[2][1] = ( 2*q.y*q.z - 2*q.w*q.x);
t.M[2][2] = ( 1 - (2*q.x*q.x + 2*q.y*q.y) );
t.M[2][3] = 0;
t.M[3][0] = 0;
t.M[3][1] = 0;
t.M[3][2] = 0;
t.M[3][3] = 1;
return t;
}
I just ran into this same problem. I was on the track to a solution, but I got stuck.
So, you'll need TWO vectors which are known in both coordinate systems. In my case, I have 2 orthonormal vectors in the coordinate system of a device (gravity and magnetic field), and I want to find the quaternion to rotate from device coordinates to global orientation (where North is positive Y, and "up" is positive Z). So, in my case, I've measured the vectors in the device coordinate space, and I'm defining the vectors themselves to form the orthonormal basis for the global system.
With that said, consider the axis-angle interpretation of quaternions, there is some vector V about which the device's coordinates can be rotated by some angle to match the global coordinates. I'll call my (negative) gravity vector G, and magnetic field M (both are normalized).
V, G and M all describe points on the unit sphere.
So do Z_dev and Y_dev (the Z and Y bases for my device's coordinate system).
The goal is to find a rotation which maps G onto Z_dev and M onto Y_dev.
For V to rotate G onto Z_dev the distance between the points defined by G and V must be the same as the distance between the points defined by V and Z_dev. In equations:
|V - G| = |V - Z_dev|
The solution to this equation forms a plane (all points equidistant to G and Z_dev). But, V is constrained to be unit-length, which means the solution is a ring centered on the origin -- still an infinite number of points.
But, the same situation is true of Y_dev, M and V:
|V - M| = |V - Y_dev|
The solution to this is also a ring centered on the origin. These rings have two intersection points, where one is the negative of the other. Either is a valid axis of rotation (the angle of rotation will just be negative in one case).
Using the two equations above, and the fact that each of these vectors is unit length you should be able to solve for V.
Then you just have to find the angle to rotate by, which you should be able to do using the vectors going from V to your corresponding bases (G and Z_dev for me).
Ultimately, I got gummed up towards the end of the algebra in solving for V.. but either way, I think everything you need is here -- maybe you'll have better luck than I did.
Define 3x3 matrices A and B as you gave them, so the columns of A are x_A,x_B, and x_C and the columns of B are similarly defined. Then the transformation T taking coordinate system A to B is the solution TA = B, so T = BA^{-1}. From the rotation matrix T of the transformation you can calculate the quaternion using standard methods.
You need to express the orientation of B, with respect to A as a quaternion Q. Then any vector in B can be transformed to a vector in A e.g. by using a rotation matrix R derived from Q. vectorInA = R*vectorInB.
There is a demo script for doing this (including a nice visualization) in the Matlab/Octave library available on this site: http://simonbox.info/index.php/blog/86-rocket-news/92-quaternions-to-model-rotations
You can compute what you want using only quaternion algebra.
Given two unit vectors v1 and v2 you can directly embed them into quaternion algebra and get the corresponding pure quaternions q1 and q2. The rotation quaternion Q that align the two vectors such that:
Q q1 Q* = q2
is given by:
Q = q1 (q1 + q2)/(||q1 + q2||)
The above product is the quaternion product.
I have two sets of 3D points (original and reconstructed) and correspondence information about pairs - which point from one set represents the second one. I need to find 3D translation and scaling factor which transforms reconstruct set so the sum of square distances would be least (rotation would be nice too, but points are rotated similarly, so this is not main priority and might be omitted in sake of simplicity and speed). And so my question is - is this solved and available somewhere on the Internet? Personally, I would use least square method, but I don't have much time (and although I'm somewhat good at math, I don't use it often, so it would be better for me to avoid it), so I would like to use other's solution if it exists. I prefer solution in C++, for example using OpenCV, but algorithm alone is good enough.
If there is no such solution, I will calculate it by myself, I don't want to bother you so much.
SOLUTION: (from your answers)
For me it's Kabsch alhorithm;
Base info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabsch_algorithm
General solution: http://nghiaho.com/?page_id=671
STILL NOT SOLVED:
I also need scale. Scale values from SVD are not understandable for me; when I need scale about 1-4 for all axises (estimated by me), SVD scale is about [2000, 200, 20], which is not helping at all.
Since you are already using Kabsch algorithm, just have a look at Umeyama's paper which extends it to get scale. All you need to do is to get the standard deviation of your points and calculate scale as:
(1/sigma^2)*trace(D*S)
where D is the diagonal matrix in SVD decomposition in the rotation estimation and S is either identity matrix or [1 1 -1] diagonal matrix, depending on the sign of determinant of UV (which Kabsch uses to correct reflections into proper rotations). So if you have [2000, 200, 20], multiply the last element by +-1 (depending on the sign of determinant of UV), sum them and divide by the standard deviation of your points to get scale.
You can recycle the following code, which is using the Eigen library:
typedef Eigen::Matrix<double, 3, 1, Eigen::DontAlign> Vector3d_U; // microsoft's 32-bit compiler can't put Eigen::Vector3d inside a std::vector. for other compilers or for 64-bit, feel free to replace this by Eigen::Vector3d
/**
* #brief rigidly aligns two sets of poses
*
* This calculates such a relative pose <tt>R, t</tt>, such that:
*
* #code
* _TyVector v_pose = R * r_vertices[i] + t;
* double f_error = (r_tar_vertices[i] - v_pose).squaredNorm();
* #endcode
*
* The sum of squared errors in <tt>f_error</tt> for each <tt>i</tt> is minimized.
*
* #param[in] r_vertices is a set of vertices to be aligned
* #param[in] r_tar_vertices is a set of vertices to align to
*
* #return Returns a relative pose that rigidly aligns the two given sets of poses.
*
* #note This requires the two sets of poses to have the corresponding vertices stored under the same index.
*/
static std::pair<Eigen::Matrix3d, Eigen::Vector3d> t_Align_Points(
const std::vector<Vector3d_U> &r_vertices, const std::vector<Vector3d_U> &r_tar_vertices)
{
_ASSERTE(r_tar_vertices.size() == r_vertices.size());
const size_t n = r_vertices.size();
Eigen::Vector3d v_center_tar3 = Eigen::Vector3d::Zero(), v_center3 = Eigen::Vector3d::Zero();
for(size_t i = 0; i < n; ++ i) {
v_center_tar3 += r_tar_vertices[i];
v_center3 += r_vertices[i];
}
v_center_tar3 /= double(n);
v_center3 /= double(n);
// calculate centers of positions, potentially extend to 3D
double f_sd2_tar = 0, f_sd2 = 0; // only one of those is really needed
Eigen::Matrix3d t_cov = Eigen::Matrix3d::Zero();
for(size_t i = 0; i < n; ++ i) {
Eigen::Vector3d v_vert_i_tar = r_tar_vertices[i] - v_center_tar3;
Eigen::Vector3d v_vert_i = r_vertices[i] - v_center3;
// get both vertices
f_sd2 += v_vert_i.squaredNorm();
f_sd2_tar += v_vert_i_tar.squaredNorm();
// accumulate squared standard deviation (only one of those is really needed)
t_cov.noalias() += v_vert_i * v_vert_i_tar.transpose();
// accumulate covariance
}
// calculate the covariance matrix
Eigen::JacobiSVD<Eigen::Matrix3d> svd(t_cov, Eigen::ComputeFullU | Eigen::ComputeFullV);
// calculate the SVD
Eigen::Matrix3d R = svd.matrixV() * svd.matrixU().transpose();
// compute the rotation
double f_det = R.determinant();
Eigen::Vector3d e(1, 1, (f_det < 0)? -1 : 1);
// calculate determinant of V*U^T to disambiguate rotation sign
if(f_det < 0)
R.noalias() = svd.matrixV() * e.asDiagonal() * svd.matrixU().transpose();
// recompute the rotation part if the determinant was negative
R = Eigen::Quaterniond(R).normalized().toRotationMatrix();
// renormalize the rotation (not needed but gives slightly more orthogonal transformations)
double f_scale = svd.singularValues().dot(e) / f_sd2_tar;
double f_inv_scale = svd.singularValues().dot(e) / f_sd2; // only one of those is needed
// calculate the scale
R *= f_inv_scale;
// apply scale
Eigen::Vector3d t = v_center_tar3 - (R * v_center3); // R needs to contain scale here, otherwise the translation is wrong
// want to align center with ground truth
return std::make_pair(R, t); // or put it in a single 4x4 matrix if you like
}
For 3D points the problem is known as the Absolute Orientation problem. A c++ implementation is available from Eigen http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/dox/group__Geometry__Module.html#gab3f5a82a24490b936f8694cf8fef8e60 and paper http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs273/refs/umeyama.pdf
you can use it via opencv by converting the matrices to eigen with cv::cv2eigen() calls.
Start with translation of both sets of points. So that their centroid coincides with the origin of the coordinate system. Translation vector is just the difference between these centroids.
Now we have two sets of coordinates represented as matrices P and Q. One set of points may be obtained from other one by applying some linear operator (which performs both scaling and rotation). This operator is represented by 3x3 matrix X:
P * X = Q
To find proper scale/rotation we just need to solve this matrix equation, find X, then decompose it into several matrices, each representing some scaling or rotation.
A simple (but probably not numerically stable) way to solve it is to multiply both parts of the equation to the transposed matrix P (to get rid of non-square matrices), then multiply both parts of the equation to the inverted PT * P:
PT * P * X = PT * Q
X = (PT * P)-1 * PT * Q
Applying Singular value decomposition to matrix X gives two rotation matrices and a matrix with scale factors:
X = U * S * V
Here S is a diagonal matrix with scale factors (one scale for each coordinate), U and V are rotation matrices, one properly rotates the points so that they may be scaled along the coordinate axes, other one rotates them once more to align their orientation to second set of points.
Example (2D points are used for simplicity):
P = 1 2 Q = 7.5391 4.3455
2 3 12.9796 5.8897
-2 1 -4.5847 5.3159
-1 -6 -15.9340 -15.5511
After solving the equation:
X = 3.3417 -1.2573
2.0987 2.8014
After SVD decomposition:
U = -0.7317 -0.6816
-0.6816 0.7317
S = 4 0
0 3
V = -0.9689 -0.2474
-0.2474 0.9689
Here SVD has properly reconstructed all manipulations I performed on matrix P to get matrix Q: rotate by the angle 0.75, scale X axis by 4, scale Y axis by 3, rotate by the angle -0.25.
If sets of points are scaled uniformly (scale factor is equal by each axis), this procedure may be significantly simplified.
Just use Kabsch algorithm to get translation/rotation values. Then perform these translation and rotation (centroids should coincide with the origin of the coordinate system). Then for each pair of points (and for each coordinate) estimate Linear regression. Linear regression coefficient is exactly the scale factor.
A good explanation Finding optimal rotation and translation between corresponding 3D points
The code is in matlab but it's trivial to convert to opengl using the cv::SVD function
You might want to try ICP (Iterative closest point).
Given two sets of 3d points, it will tell you the transformation (rotation + translation) to go from the first set to the second one.
If you're interested in a c++ lightweight implementation, try libicp.
Good luck!
The general transformation, as well the scale can be retrieved via Procrustes Analysis. It works by superimposing the objects on top of each other and tries to estimate the transformation from that setting. It has been used in the context of ICP, many times. In fact, your preference, Kabash algorithm is a special case of this.
Moreover, Horn's alignment algorithm (based on quaternions) also finds a very good solution, while being quite efficient. A Matlab implementation is also available.
Scale can be inferred without SVD, if your points are uniformly scaled in all directions (I could not make sense of SVD-s scale matrix either). Here is how I solved the same problem:
Measure distances of each point to other points in the point cloud to get a 2d table of distances, where entry at (i,j) is norm(point_i-point_j). Do the same thing for the other point cloud, so you get two tables -- one for original and the other for reconstructed points.
Divide all values in one table by the corresponding values in the other table. Because the points correspond to each other, the distances do too. Ideally, the resulting table has all values being equal to each other, and this is the scale.
The median value of the divisions should be pretty close to the scale you are looking for. The mean value is also close, but I chose median just to exclude outliers.
Now you can use the scale value to scale all the reconstructed points and then proceed to estimating the rotation.
Tip: If there are too many points in the point clouds to find distances between all of them, then a smaller subset of distances will work, too, as long as it is the same subset for both point clouds. Ideally, just one distance pair would work if there is no measurement noise, e.g when one point cloud is directly derived from the other by just rotating it.
you can also use ScaleRatio ICP proposed by BaoweiLin
The code can be found in github