Horizon Leveling Video Constraint Model Using Roll-Pitch-Yaw Axes
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing video stabilization methods that do not cover the full 180 degrees of roll angle for horizon leveling result in only partial horizon leveling of visual content, leading to incomplete stabilization and leveling of scenes.
Innovation Solution
A system that generates a constraint model using a roll-pitch-yaw axes representation to determine feasible viewing window placement, ensuring the punchout field of view fits within the source field of view, allowing for full horizon leveling by adjusting the pitch and yaw angles of the viewing window placement.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Device complexity
If a constraint model that does not cover full roll angle is used for horizon leveling, then the device complexity is reduced, but the horizon leveling completeness deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The constraint model is segmented into multiple discrete roll angle positions (e.g., 0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°) rather than attempting to cover the continuous full range. This segmentation allows the system to achieve complete horizon leveling through discrete sampling points, resolving the contradiction by making the model manageable in complexity while maintaining reliability through strategic position selection.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies partial action by selecting specific critical roll angle positions (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°) rather than covering every possible angle. This partial sampling is sufficient to enable complete horizon leveling because these positions represent the essential orientations needed to level the horizon in all directions, thus achieving full functionality without requiring a complete continuous model.
2Reliability
If the viewing window placement is adjusted to cover 180 degrees of roll angle, then the horizon leveling completeness is improved, but the computational complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The viewing window placement computation is segmented into discrete roll angle positions (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°) rather than requiring continuous computation across all angles. This segmentation reduces computational complexity while maintaining horizon leveling completeness by focusing calculations only on these critical positions that collectively cover the full 180-degree range.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs partial computation by calculating viewing window placements only at specific roll angle positions (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°) rather than computing for every possible angle. This partial computational approach is sufficient to achieve complete horizon leveling because these discrete positions provide the necessary coverage to level the horizon in all directions, thus reducing computational burden while maintaining reliability.
Data Source
AI summary
A constraint model that includes a representation of feasible viewing window placement within a source field of view of visual content may be generated by using a roll-pitch-yaw axes representation of viewing window placement and having a diagonal dimension of the viewing window that fit within vertical and horizonal dimensions of the source field of view. The constraint model may enable full horizon leveling of the visual content.


