generic-library/opencv
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

Merge pull request #2892 from PhilLab:patch-1

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Vadim Pisarevsky 2014-06-24 11:52:36 +00:00
commit b6769c9db1
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
doc/py_tutorials/py_feature2d/py_matcher/py_matcher.rst
View File

@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Basics of Brute-Force Matcher
Brute-Force matcher is simple. It takes the descriptor of one feature in first set and is matched with all other features in second set using some distance calculation. And the closest one is returned.
For BF matcher, first we have to create the BFMatcher object using **cv2.BFMatcher()**. It takes two optional params. First one is ``normType``. It specifies the distance measurement to be used. By default, it is ``cv2.NORM_L2``. It is good for SIFT, SURF etc (``cv2.NORM_L1`` is also there). For binary string based descriptors like ORB, BRIEF, BRISK etc, ``cv2.NORM_HAMMING`` should be used, which used Hamming distance as measurement. If ORB is using ``VTA_K == 3 or 4``, ``cv2.NORM_HAMMING2`` should be used.
For BF matcher, first we have to create the BFMatcher object using **cv2.BFMatcher()**. It takes two optional params. First one is ``normType``. It specifies the distance measurement to be used. By default, it is ``cv2.NORM_L2``. It is good for SIFT, SURF etc (``cv2.NORM_L1`` is also there). For binary string based descriptors like ORB, BRIEF, BRISK etc, ``cv2.NORM_HAMMING`` should be used, which used Hamming distance as measurement. If ORB is using ``WTA_K == 3 or 4``, ``cv2.NORM_HAMMING2`` should be used.
Second param is boolean variable, ``crossCheck`` which is false by default. If it is true, Matcher returns only those matches with value (i,j) such that i-th descriptor in set A has j-th descriptor in set B as the best match and vice-versa. That is, the two features in both sets should match each other. It provides consistant result, and is a good alternative to ratio test proposed by D.Lowe in SIFT paper.