Replies: 1 comment 3 replies
-
The tracker returns the bbox predictions ahead: Not the yolo predicted bboxes. When there is intrinsic motion from the camera, this has to be taken into consideration as well when doing the prediction ahead. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
3 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Hello!
I built a custom tracker using your implementation of StrongSORT. I have a the detections from a yoloR detector, trained a custom appearance descriptor for my use case (traffic signs) and I am working on images (snapshots 1-2 frames /s, I don't have access to videos). So I have images taken from a car, I need to track each traffic sign (camera is moving, objects are fixed).
After running the algorithm, I noticed that some fine-tuning is needed:
Because of
the first 2 frames don't have track ids assigned, after setting N_INIT: 0, ids are still missing from the first frame.
BUT the biggest problem is something else:
frame 12:
array([ 1764, 859, 1795, 933, 1, 123, 0.94644]) # output of tracker
array([[ 1765, 860, 1795, 933, 0.94644, 123]]) # det I am passing to the tracker
frame 13:
array([ 1610, 816, 1643, 895, 1, 123, 0.92171]) # output
array([[ 1610, 816, 1644, 896, 0.92171, 123]]). # det
frame 14:
array([ 1488, 760, 1523, 843, 1, 123, 0.92171]) # output
array([[ 817, 732, 849, 821, 0.73291, 123]]). # det
I noticed some of the bboxes get shifted, even if I pass the correct ones to the tracker. (when I write the jpg with the bbox / check the txt, it is not in the right place, track id is correct)
In this particular case, there is a significant change from frame 13 to frame 14.
tracker.camera_update(prev_frames[i], curr_frames[I]) does this compensation I guess, any ideea how could I fine tune ECC #Compute the warp matrix from src to dst ?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions