Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 58 references

Event fields: Capturing light fields at high speed, resolution, and dynamic range

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Event cameras, fitted with a kaleidoscope or a galvanometer, can capture light fields — the full set of ray directions — at high speed, high resolution, and high dynamic range, enabling post-capture refocusing and instant depth estimation…

desk verdict A genuinely new galvanometer-based light field sensing idea with a clean theoretical core, but the headline results ride on off-distribution neural reconstructions and lack quantitative validation; worthy of peer review with substantial revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06191 v1 pith:7BCGGN6J submitted 2024-12-09 cs.CV

Ziyuan Qu , Zihao Zou , Vivek Boominathan , Praneeth Chakravarthula , Adithya Pediredla This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords eventcameralightfieldtemporalmultiplexingspatialgalvanometerkaleidoscopehighdynamicrangedepthestimation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Event cameras report per-pixel brightness changes asynchronously, which makes them fast and high-dynamic-range but blind to angular information — ordinary cameras integrate over all ray directions. The paper proposes 'event fields,' a way to multiplex angular information into either space or time so the same event sensor records a light field. A kaleidoscope design spatially splits the view into multiple angles and captures temporal derivatives per view; a galvanometer design scans the view along a Lissajous curve and directly captures angular derivatives. With the galvanometer, the authors report a structured light field at 250 frames per second with 40 views at megapixel resolution, which they state is the fastest recorded at that resolution. If this holds, light-field features like refocusing and depth estimation become available for fast, high-dynamic-range scenes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the derivative identity produced by optical multiplexing. A galvanometer steering the rays along a periodic curve $C(t)$ makes the event camera's thresholded brightness change proportional to the angular derivative of the light field times the steering velocity; for static scenes this reduces to $\partial L/\partial \omega$ along the scan. The scan curve is a Lissajous curve, and because the steering signal is known, every event carries a known angular view, giving a structured light field with no loss of spatial resolution. The kaleidoscope instead uses a spatial mapping $x_s = x \bmod (r/n)$ to assign each pixel to one of $n$ views, trading spatial resolution for angular resolution while keeping events as temporal derivatives. Reconstruction from these derivative streams uses pre-trained event-to-video networks, and refocusing integrates the recovered views over the angular dimension.

What would settle it

Render a scene with a known light field and depth map using the paper's own simulator, synthesize events from the galvanometer's temporal-multiplexing model, run the full reconstruction-plus-refocusing pipeline, and compare the output against ground-truth refocused images and depth; large error specifically along the angular-derivative direction, or depth bias that changes with surface texture, would falsify the claim that the galvanometer design captures a usable structured light field.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that an event camera can act as a light-field sensor if the angular dimension is multiplexed before the sensor. Spatial multiplexing places several angular views side by side, so each pixel responds to the temporal derivative of the brightness of its view. Temporal multiplexing steers the rays with a fast mirror, so the brightness change at a pixel is the angular derivative of the light field along the scan curve times the steering speed, i.e., $\partial B/\partial t \approx (\partial B/\partial \omega)(\partial C/\partial t)$. Because light fields are typically smooth, both temporal and angular derivatives are sparse, so the event stream stays within the camera's bandwidth. The galvanometer design yields a structured event field — the view at every event time is known from the calibrated scan — from which the paper reconstructs intensity frames, refocuses them over depth, and estimates depth from focus on a moving person at 100 Hz. The kaleidoscope design, combined with a co-located RGB camera and an event-to-video interpolation network, produces slow-motion color light-field video with refocusing on dynamic scenes.

Load-bearing premise

The recovered frames, and therefore the refocusing and depth results, are produced by pre-trained event-to-video networks that were optimized for ordinary time-sequential event streams, not for the angular-derivative streams these optics generate; if those networks do not faithfully invert angular derivatives, the demonstrated light-field capabilities are not actually delivered by the hardware.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Post-capture refocusing becomes possible on fast dynamic scenes—the paper demonstrates refocusing on a fan spinning at 480 RPM—something frame-based light-field cameras cannot do at these speeds.
  • Instant true depth becomes available at the scan rate (e.g., 100 Hz) via depth-from-focus, without SLAM or multi-camera arrays.
  • The event camera's wide dynamic range carries over to the light field, so HDR light fields can be captured in a single shot without bracketing.
  • The galvanometer design preserves full spatial resolution and gives a structured, pre-calibrated field, so per-frame calibration is not needed.
  • Because angular derivatives are sparse, the bandwidth cost of adding the angular dimension is modest; in the paper's experiments, 250 Hz scanning stays within the event camera's readout limits.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • We would push the bandwidth analysis further: since the 250 Hz ceiling comes from event readout saturation, adaptive scan rates that slow for static regions and speed up for moving ones—flagged in the paper as future work—could raise the dynamic light-field rate beyond 250 fps without new hardware.
  • The reliance on networks trained for time-sequential events suggests the reported reconstructions likely understate the hardware's potential; generating event-field training data, as the paper suggests, should measurably improve refocused image quality, a claim that could be tested by fine-tuning on synthetic event fields.
  • The kaleidoscope's spatial-resolution loss and blindness to static scenes make the two designs complementary; a hybrid that uses the galvanometer for full-resolution static context and the kaleidoscope for high-speed dynamic views is a natural engineering extension.
  • Depth-from-focus assumes disparity is proportional to depth across the Lissajous scan; we would test the method's behavior near scan-curve self-crossings and on non-Lambertian surfaces, where this proportionality is expected to break down.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'Event Fields', a framework for capturing light fields with event cameras by multiplexing angular information into either the spatial or temporal domain. Two hardware designs are presented: a kaleidoscope-based spatial multiplexer and a galvanometer-based temporal multiplexer. The authors provide a mathematical model (Sec. 4), a Blender-based simulator (Sec. 5.1), hardware prototypes (Secs. 5.2, 5.3), and demonstrations of HDR light fields, slow-motion refocusing, post-capture refocusing, and depth estimation (Sec. 6). The central claim is that event fields enable light-field capture at high speed, resolution, and dynamic range, with the galvanometer design achieving 250 fps and 40 views at megapixel resolution.

Significance. The concept of event fields is novel and timely, and the mathematical derivation in Sec. 4 is sound for the ideal noiseless event camera. The two complementary multiplexing designs are clearly articulated, and the authors have built a simulator and real prototypes, with code and data promised open-source. The potential applications—high-speed refocusing, HDR light-field capture, and instant depth estimation—are compelling. However, the significance is currently limited by the qualitative nature of the evaluation and the reliance of all downstream results on off-the-shelf event-to-video networks that are not designed for event-field inputs. If the authors add quantitative validation and address the reconstruction-fidelity concern, this could be a strong contribution to computational imaging.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 6.1, 6.4] The evaluation in Sec. 6 is almost entirely qualitative. Fig. 5 compares kaleidoscope vs. galvanometer on a simulated scene, but the comparison rests on visual inspection of insets; no PSNR/SSIM or other quantitative metrics are reported for the reconstructed views, refocused images, or depth maps. Since the Blender simulator can generate ground-truth light fields, the authors should provide quantitative numbers for view reconstruction accuracy, refocusing fidelity, and depth error. This is load-bearing because the paper's central claim is that event fields 'capture light fields at high speed, resolution, and dynamic range,' and that claim cannot be assessed without quantitative evidence.
  2. [Sec. 4.2, Sec. 6.4, Sec. 7] The use of pre-trained E2VID and TimeLens networks is a major correctness risk. Equation (5) shows that, for static content, the galvanometer events encode angular derivatives ∂B/∂ω scaled by the scan velocity, not temporal derivatives; for dynamic content they encode an inseparable sum of angular and temporal derivatives. These input distributions differ substantially from the time-sequential event streams for which E2VID and TimeLens were trained. All downstream results—the reconstructed light field views, refocused images, depth maps, and HDR output—are computed from these network outputs, not from direct measurements. The paper itself concedes in Sec. 7 that 'training models specifically for our event fields would yield a significant performance boost.' Without a ground-truth comparison of the reconstructed views against known light fields, or an analysis of reconstruction error on off-distribution inputs, the central demonstrations could be artifacts of the network rather than genuine captures. Please add a validation experiment using the simulator where ground truth is available, or fine-tune the networks on event-field data and re-evaluate.
  3. [Sec. 6.5, Supp. Fig. 3] The 'instant true depth estimation' claim is overstated. The method in Sec. 6.5 relies on a depth-from-focus algorithm to obtain disparity, which is then converted to physical depth via a linear calibration fit to seven LED positions between 15 and 100 inches (Supp. Fig. 3). This is a fitted, scene-dependent calibration, not a first-principles depth measurement. The paper does not report depth accuracy or error bars, and the linear model's validity outside the calibrated range is unknown. Please provide quantitative depth error against known depths, and qualify the term 'true depth' accordingly.
  4. [Sec. 6.4] The claim that the reconstructed light field at '250 fps and 40 views' is 'the fastest recorded so far at a megapixel resolution' is unsupported: no comparison baseline, citation, or quantitative measure of 'fastest' is given. Additionally, Fig. 11 shows that the event camera loses events due to readout bandwidth limits at scanning frequencies beyond 250 Hz, so the actual light-field quality is affected by event loss. Please provide a clear definition and evidence for this claim, and discuss how bandwidth limitations affect the reported frame rate and view count.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, Eq. (3)] The notation in the mapping function 'xs = x mod (r/n)' is unclear. Please define x, r, and n explicitly (e.g., pixel index, sensor width, number of angular views) and specify whether this is a 1D or 2D mapping.
  2. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (2)] The derivation uses an equality where an approximation is implied: ∂B/∂t = pkC/∆tk is a finite-difference approximation. Consider using '≈' consistently and mention that this holds in the limit of small ∆t.
  3. [Sec. 5.2, Fig. 3] The text states the kaleidoscope captures a '3 × 3 views' light field, but Fig. 3 does not clearly show the view grid. Please annotate the figure or add a separate illustration of the 3×3 angular views.
  4. [Supp. Fig. 1] The calibration in Supp. Fig. 1 uses template matching on E2VID-reconstructed frames to determine the scanning curve. Please state how potential reconstruction artifacts (e.g., blur or hallucination) might bias this calibration, and whether the calibration was verified against independent measurements.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the event-field equations are direct chain-rule applications, and the depth calibration is explicitly disclosed rather than disguised as a first-principles derivation.

full rationale

The core derivation of Event Fields is self-contained. Equation (4) follows from the standard event-camera equation (2) after spatial multiplexing, and Equation (5) is a direct chain-rule application for temporal multiplexing: dB/dt = (dB/domega)*(dC/dt). Neither equation is defined in terms of the target claim. The depth estimation does rely on a fitted depth-to-disparity calibration (Supplementary Figure 3), but the paper explicitly labels this as calibration and uses known LED depths as external ground truth; it is a standard calibrated measurement, not a circular prediction. The reconstruction of intensity frames using pretrained E2VID and TimeLens models is a domain-mismatch correctness concern, and the paper itself acknowledges in Section 7 that these models are optimized for time-sequential event streams and that training on event-field data would yield a performance boost; this is an external validation gap, not a circular reduction. The only self-citation is an anonymous code repository link [2], which is not load-bearing and does not support any scientific claim. No equation or fitted parameter reduces by construction to its own input, so no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The depth results depend on a fitted calibration line, and the reconstruction depends on pre-trained neural networks. No new physical entities are introduced; the 'event field' is a data representation, not a postulated object.

free parameters (4)
  • Depth-disparity calibration slope = not specified numerically
    Fitted in Supp. Fig. 3 from 7 LED depth measurements; converts disparity (pixels) to real depth (inches).
  • Depth-disparity calibration intercept = not specified numerically
    Y-intercept of the same linear fit, representing the camera-to-galvo distance in pixels.
  • Galvanometer scan frequencies = 250 Hz, 100 Hz, and 1 Hz in different experiments
    Scan frequencies are chosen per experiment to balance scan speed, event bandwidth, and scene dynamics (Sec. 6.4, 6.5, Supp. Fig. 2).
  • E2VID reconstruction frame rate = 10,000 fps
    E2VID was run to reconstruct a 10,000 fps video; light field frames are formed by binning these frames. This rate is a processing choice, not derived.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Light fields are mostly smooth, so angular derivatives are sparse.
    Invoked in Sec. 3.2 to justify that temporal multiplexing does not significantly increase bandwidth requirements; cited to [21,54].
  • domain assumption The ideal event camera model in Eq. (2) is noise-free and threshold-based.
    Used throughout to derive event field equations; real event cameras deviate from this.
  • domain assumption The galvanometer scanning curve C(t) is known or calibratable from events.
    Required to map event timestamps to angular views; calibration via template matching is described in Supp. Sec. 1.
  • ad hoc to paper Pre-trained E2VID and TimeLens networks reconstruct accurate frames from event fields.
    Sec. 6.4 and Sec. 6.3 rely on these networks; the paper notes in Sec. 7 that these are optimized for time-sequential event streams and are suboptimal for event fields.
  • ad hoc to paper Depth is linearly proportional to disparity over the calibrated range.
    Supp. Fig. 3 fits a line to 7 depths; this linear model underlies immediate true depth estimation (Sec. 6.5).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Event fields: Capturing light fields at high speed, resolution, and dynamic range." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7BCGGN6J

@misc{pith2026241206191,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Event fields: Capturing light fields at high speed, resolution, and dynamic range},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7BCGGN6J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06191}
}
read the original abstract

Event cameras, which feature pixels that independently respond to changes in brightness, are becoming increasingly popular in high-speed applications due to their lower latency, reduced bandwidth requirements, and enhanced dynamic range compared to traditional frame-based cameras. Numerous imaging and vision techniques have leveraged event cameras for high-speed scene understanding by capturing high-framerate, high-dynamic range videos, primarily utilizing the temporal advantages inherent to event cameras. Additionally, imaging and vision techniques have utilized the light field-a complementary dimension to temporal information-for enhanced scene understanding. In this work, we propose "Event Fields", a new approach that utilizes innovative optical designs for event cameras to capture light fields at high speed. We develop the underlying mathematical framework for Event Fields and introduce two foundational frameworks to capture them practically: spatial multiplexing to capture temporal derivatives and temporal multiplexing to capture angular derivatives. To realize these, we design two complementary optical setups one using a kaleidoscope for spatial multiplexing and another using a galvanometer for temporal multiplexing. We evaluate the performance of both designs using a custom-built simulator and real hardware prototypes, showcasing their distinct benefits. Our event fields unlock the full advantages of typical light fields-like post-capture refocusing and depth estimation-now supercharged for high-speed and high-dynamic range scenes. This novel light-sensing paradigm opens doors to new applications in photography, robotics, and AR/VR, and presents fresh challenges in rendering and machine learning.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06191 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. We introduce Event Fields, a novel framework that leverages event cameras to capture light fields at high speed, resolution, and dynamic range using innovative optical designs. Event fields integrate the unique advantages of event sensing—such as low latency, data efficiency, and power-saving capabilities—with the detailed angular information provided by light field sensing. We demonstrate the versatility of the eve… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Blender plugin for physics-based event field rendering. scenes, the event camera measurement is ∂B(x, C(t)) ∂t = ∂B(x, ω) ∂ω ∂C(t) ∂t [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Kaleidoscope design. (a) Ray sketch illustrating the light path through the rectangular kaleidoscope system, where rays from different angles are directed towards the event camera. (b) Hardware setup showing the main lens, rectangular kaleidoscope, beam splitter, event camera, and RGB camera. The main lens fo￾cuses the scene onto the kaleidoscope, which splits the view into multiple angles. The beam splitter directs… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Galvanometer design. (a) Ray sketch illustrating the angular separation achieved by controlling mirror angles in the galvanometer setup. (b) Hardware setup showing the galvanome￾ter mirror system integrated with the event camera. This design allows for capturing angula…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Simulation) comparison of spatial (kaleidoscope) and temporal (galvanometer) multiplexing techniques. (a) A simulated scene with swirling water and moving objects, with a stationary box. The swirl direction is marked in blue, and one object is highlighted for detailed…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Experimental) comparison of multiplexing tech￾niques. (a) Reference scene with a grid pattern. (b) When the grid moves horizontally, the kaleidoscope design cannot capture horizontal lines as intensity does not change along this axis. (c) Using a galvanometer that sca…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: High dynamic range (HDR) light field. A high dy￾namic range scene is captured with a standard RGB camera using (a) short exposure and (b) long exposure, and both fail to capture the full dynamic range. In contrast, (c) the HDR light field re￾constructed from the event …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: SlowMoRF: Slow motion refocusing with kaleidoscope and sensor fusion. (a) Original setup with Lego pieces floating in a water tank as a wooden brick is thrown in, with CVPR in the background, (b) Captured raw frames with aligned events using kaleidoscope design, and (c…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: High-speed refocusing on a toy dart. The original video was captured at 120 fps, interpolating seven frames between each pair of original frames, resulting in a 960 fps high-speed light field video. The images shown here are all the middle (the fourth) interpolated fra…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Effect of galvo scan frequency for refocusing accuracy. The scene consists of two static objects positioned in the foreground and background, along with a fan (highlighted in yellow boxes) in the foreground rotating at 480 RPM. The static objects (highlighted in red a…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Instant true depth estimation at 100 Hz. Depth map￾ping of a running person, shown in three frames with color-coded depth scale (in inches), highlighting the system’s capability for rapid, accurate depth measurement in dynamic scenes. ing on fast-moving objects, real-…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The plenoptic function and the elements of early vision

    Edward H Adelson, James R Bergen, et al. The plenoptic function and the elements of early vision. Vision and Model- ing Group, Media Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of . . . ,

    work page

  2. [2]

    Event field

    Anonymous. Event field. https : / / anonymous . 4open.science/r/Event-Field-B5F3/, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Event-based visual flow

    Ryad Benosman, Charles Clercq, Xavier Lagorce, Sio-Hoi Ieng, and Chiara Bartolozzi. Event-based visual flow. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems , 25 (2):407–417, 2013. 2

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    The light field camera: Extended depth of field, aliasing, and superresolution

    Tom E Bishop and Paolo Favaro. The light field camera: Extended depth of field, aliasing, and superresolution. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , 34(5):972–986, 2011. 3

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    A 240 × 180 130 db 3 µs latency global shutter spatiotemporal vision sensor

    Christian Brandli, Raphael Berner, Minhao Yang, Shih-Chii Liu, and Tobi Delbruck. A 240 × 180 130 db 3 µs latency global shutter spatiotemporal vision sensor. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 49(10):2333–2341, 2014. 3

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Past, present, and future of simultaneous localiza- tion and mapping: Toward the robust-perception age

    Cesar Cadena, Luca Carlone, Henry Carrillo, Yasir Latif, Davide Scaramuzza, Jos ´e Neira, Ian Reid, and John J Leonard. Past, present, and future of simultaneous localiza- tion and mapping: Toward the robust-perception age. IEEE Transactions on robotics, 32(6):1309–1332, 2016. 8

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Recent event camera innovations: A survey

    Bharatesh Chakravarthi, Aayush Atul Verma, Kostas Dani- ilidis, Cornelia Fermuller, and Yezhou Yang. Recent event camera innovations: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13627, 2024. 2

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Blender - a 3d modelling and rendering package, 2024

    Blender Online Community. Blender - a 3d modelling and rendering package, 2024. 4

    work page 2024

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    Event-based, 6-dof camera tracking from photometric depth maps

    Guillermo Gallego, Jon EA Lund, Elias Mueggler, Henri Re- becq, Tobi Delbruck, and Davide Scaramuzza. Event-based, 6-dof camera tracking from photometric depth maps. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , 40(10):2402–2412, 2017. 3

    2017

  2. [10]

    Event-based vision: A survey

    Guillermo Gallego, Tobi Delbr ¨uck, Garrick Orchard, Chiara Bartolozzi, Brian Taba, Andrea Censi, Stefan Leutenegger, Andrew J Davison, J ¨org Conradt, Kostas Daniilidis, et al. Event-based vision: A survey. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 44(1)...

    2020

  3. [11]

    E-raft: Dense optical flow from event cam- eras

    Mathias Gehrig, Mario Millh ¨ausler, Daniel Gehrig, and Da- vide Scaramuzza. E-raft: Dense optical flow from event cam- eras. In 2021 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 197–206. IEEE, 2021. 2

    2021

  4. [12]

    Gortler, Radek Grzeszczuk, Richard Szeliski, and Michael F

    Steven J. Gortler, Radek Grzeszczuk, Richard Szeliski, and Michael F. Cohen. The lumigraph. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Inter- active Techniques, page 43–54, New York, NY , USA, 1996. Association for Computing Machinery. 2, 3

    1996

  5. [13]

    Depth from focus

    Paul Grossmann. Depth from focus. Pattern recognition letters, 5(1):63–69, 1987. 8

    1987

  6. [14]

    Eventlfm: Event camera integrated fourier light field microscopy for ultrafast 3d imaging

    Ruipeng Guo, Qianwan Yang, Andrew S Chang, Guorong Hu, Joseph Greene, Christopher V Gabel, Sixian You, and Lei Tian. Eventlfm: Event camera integrated fourier light field microscopy for ultrafast 3d imaging. Light: Science & Applications, 13(1):144, 2024. 3

    2024

  7. [15]

    What are optimal coding functions for time-of-flight imaging? ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 37(2):1– 18, 2018

    Mohit Gupta, Andreas Velten, Shree K Nayar, and Eric Bre- itbach. What are optimal coding functions for time-of-flight imaging? ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 37(2):1– 18, 2018. 4

    2018

  8. [16]

    Time-efficient light-field acqui- sition using coded aperture and events

    Shuji Habuchi, Keita Takahashi, Chihiro Tsutake, Toshiaki Fujii, and Hajime Nagahara. Time-efficient light-field acqui- sition using coded aperture and events. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 24923–24933, 2024. 3

    2024

  9. [17]

    Microsaccade-inspired event camera for robotics

    Botao He, Ze Wang, Yuan Zhou, Jingxi Chen, Chahat Deep Singh, Haojia Li, Yuman Gao, Shaojie Shen, Kaiwei Wang, Yanjun Cao, et al. Microsaccade-inspired event camera for robotics. Science Robotics, 9(90):eadj8124, 2024. 2

    2024

  10. [18]

    High- speed structured light based 3d scanning using an event cam- era

    Xueyan Huang, Yueyi Zhang, and Zhiwei Xiong. High- speed structured light based 3d scanning using an event cam- era. Optics Express, 29(22):35864–35876, 2021. 3

    2021

  11. [19]

    Fast incident light field acquisition and rendering

    Ivo Ihrke, Timo Stich, Heiko Gottschlich, Marcus Magnor, and Hans-Peter Seidel. Fast incident light field acquisition and rendering. Journal of WSCG, 2008. 2

    2008

  12. [20]

    A framework for tran- sient rendering

    Adrian Jarabo, Julio Marco, Adolfo Munoz, Raul Buisan, Wojciech Jarosz, and Diego Gutierrez. A framework for tran- sient rendering. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), 33 (6):1–10, 2014. 8

    2014

  13. [21]

    Learn- ing light field angular super-resolution via a geometry-aware network

    Jing Jin, Junhui Hou, Hui Yuan, and Sam Kwong. Learn- ing light field angular super-resolution via a geometry-aware network. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, pages 11141–11148, 2020. 2, 3

    2020

  14. [22]

    Doppler time-of-flight rendering

    Juhyeon Kim, Wojciech Jarosz, Ioannis Gkioulekas, and Adithya Pediredla. Doppler time-of-flight rendering. ACM Trans. Graph., 42(6), 2023. 8

    2023

  15. [23]

    Event-based structured light for depth reconstruction using frequency tagged light patterns

    T Leroux, S-H Ieng, and Ryad Benosman. Event-based structured light for depth reconstruction using frequency tagged light patterns. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.10771 ,

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    M. Levoy. Light fields and computational imaging. Com- puter, 39(8):46–55, 2006. 2

    2006

  17. [25]

    Light field rendering

    Marc Levoy and Pat Hanrahan. Light field rendering. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques , page 31–42, New York, NY , USA, 1996. Association for Computing Machin- ery. 2, 3

    1996

  18. [26]

    A 128×128 120 db 15 µs latency asynchronous temporal con- trast vision sensor

    Patrick Lichtsteiner, Christoph Posch, and Tobi Delbruck. A 128×128 120 db 15 µs latency asynchronous temporal con- trast vision sensor. IEEE journal of solid-state circuits , 43 (2):566–576, 2008. 3

    2008

  19. [27]

    Temporally sliced photon primitives for time-of-flight rendering

    Yang Liu, Shaojie Jiao, and Wojciech Jarosz. Temporally sliced photon primitives for time-of-flight rendering. In Computer Graphics Forum, pages 29–40. Wiley Online Li- brary, 2022. 8

    2022

  20. [28]

    Lytro. Lytro. https://www.lytro.com/, 2017. [On- line; accessed 6-Oct-2024]. 2

    2017

  21. [29]

    The silicon retina

    Misha Mahowald and Misha Mahowald. The silicon retina. An Analog VLSI System for Stereoscopic Vision, pages 4–65,

  22. [30]

    A reconfigurable camera add-on for high dynamic range, multispectral, polarization, and light-field imaging

    Alkhazur Manakov, John Restrepo, Oliver Klehm, Ramon Hegedus, Elmar Eisemann, Hans-Peter Seidel, and Ivo Ihrke. A reconfigurable camera add-on for high dynamic range, multispectral, polarization, and light-field imaging. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 32(4):47–1, 2013. 2, 4

    2013

  23. [31]

    Neuromorphic fringe projection pro- filometry

    Ashish Rao Mangalore, Chandra Sekhar Seelamantula, and Chetan Singh Thakur. Neuromorphic fringe projection pro- filometry. IEEE Signal Processing Letters , 27:1510–1514,

  24. [32]

    Mc3d: Motion contrast 3d scanning

    Nathan Matsuda, Oliver Cossairt, and Mohit Gupta. Mc3d: Motion contrast 3d scanning. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computational Photography (ICCP) , pages 1–10. IEEE, 2015. 3

    2015

  25. [33]

    Plenoptic modeling: An image-based rendering system

    Leonard McMillan and Gary Bishop. Plenoptic modeling: An image-based rendering system. In Seminal Graphics Pa- pers: Pushing the Boundaries, Volume 2 , pages 433–440. Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. 3

    2023

  26. [34]

    Learning visual motion segmentation using event surfaces

    Anton Mitrokhin, Zhiyuan Hua, Cornelia Fermuller, and Yiannis Aloimonos. Learning visual motion segmentation using event surfaces. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14414–14423, 2020. 2

    2020

  27. [35]

    Esl: Event-based structured light

    Manasi Muglikar, Guillermo Gallego, and Davide Scara- muzza. Esl: Event-based structured light. In 2021 Inter- national Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 1165–1174. IEEE, 2021. 3

    2021

  28. [36]

    Event guided depth sensing

    Manasi Muglikar, Diederik Paul Moeys, and Davide Scara- muzza. Event guided depth sensing. In 2021 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV) , pages 385–393. IEEE,

    2021

  29. [37]

    Event-based shape from polarization

    Manasi Muglikar, Leonard Bauersfeld, Diederik Paul Moeys, and Davide Scaramuzza. Event-based shape from polarization. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 1547– 1556, 2023. 3

    2023

  30. [38]

    Event cameras meet spads for high-speed, low-bandwidth imaging

    Manasi Muglikar, Siddharth Somasundaram, Akshat Dave, Edoardo Charbon, Ramesh Raskar, and Davide Scaramuzza. Event cameras meet spads for high-speed, low-bandwidth imaging. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.11511, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Light field photography with a hand-held plenoptic camera

    Ren Ng, Marc Levoy, Mathieu Br ´edif, Gene Duval, Mark Horowitz, and Pat Hanrahan. Light field photography with a hand-held plenoptic camera. PhD thesis, Stanford university,

  32. [40]

    Path tracing estima- tors for refractive radiative transfer

    Adithya Pediredla, Yasin Karimi Chalmiani, Mat- teo Giuseppe Scopelliti, Maysamreza Chamanzar, Srinivasa Narasimhan, and Ioannis Gkioulekas. Path tracing estima- tors for refractive radiative transfer. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 39(6):1–15, 2020. 8

    2020

  33. [41]

    Laser galvo mirrors: perfect instrument for the demonstration of lissajous figures

    Lubo ˇs Pol´aˇcek, Jana Jurmanov´a, and Zdenˇek Navr´atil. Laser galvo mirrors: perfect instrument for the demonstration of lissajous figures. Physics Education, 54(5):055002, 2019. 4

    2019

  34. [42]

    A qvga 143 db dynamic range frame-free pwm image sensor with lossless pixel-level video compression and time-domain cds

    Christoph Posch, Daniel Matolin, and Rainer Wohlgenannt. A qvga 143 db dynamic range frame-free pwm image sensor with lossless pixel-level video compression and time-domain cds. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits , 46(1):259–275,

  35. [43]

    3d light field camera technology, 2017

    A Raytrix. 3d light field camera technology, 2017. 2

    2017

  36. [44]

    High speed and high dynamic range video with an event camera

    Henri Rebecq, Ren ´e Ranftl, Vladlen Koltun, and Davide Scaramuzza. High speed and high dynamic range video with an event camera. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 43(6):1964–1980, 2019. 3

    1964

  37. [45]

    Space-filling curves

    Hans Sagan. Space-filling curves. Springer Science & Busi- ness Media, 2012. 4

    2012

  38. [46]

    Axial light field for curved mirrors: Reflect your perspective, widen your view

    Yuichi Taguchi, Amit Agrawal, Srikumar Ramalingam, and Ashok Veeraraghavan. Axial light field for curved mirrors: Reflect your perspective, widen your view. In 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition, pages 499–506. IEEE, 2010. 2

    2010

  39. [47]

    Feature detection and tracking with the dynamic and active-pixel vision sensor (davis)

    David Tedaldi, Guillermo Gallego, Elias Mueggler, and Da- vide Scaramuzza. Feature detection and tracking with the dynamic and active-pixel vision sensor (davis). In 2016 Sec- ond International Conference on Event-based Control, Com- munication, and Signal Processing (EBCCSP) ...

    2016

  40. [48]

    Time lens: Event-based video frame interpo- lation

    Stepan Tulyakov, Daniel Gehrig, Stamatios Georgoulis, Julius Erbach, Mathias Gehrig, Yuanyou Li, and Davide Scaramuzza. Time lens: Event-based video frame interpo- lation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on com- puter vision and pattern recognition , pages 16155–16164,

  41. [49]

    Time lens++: Event-based frame interpolation with paramet- ric non-linear flow and multi-scale fusion

    Stepan Tulyakov, Alfredo Bochicchio, Daniel Gehrig, Sta- matios Georgoulis, Yuanyou Li, and Davide Scaramuzza. Time lens++: Event-based frame interpolation with paramet- ric non-linear flow and multi-scale fusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision an...

    2022

  42. [50]

    Learning dense and continuous optical flow from an event camera

    Zhexiong Wan, Yuchao Dai, and Yuxin Mao. Learning dense and continuous optical flow from an event camera. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 31:7237–7251, 2022. 2

    2022

  43. [51]

    Light field image processing: An overview

    Gaochang Wu, Belen Masia, Adrian Jarabo, Yuchen Zhang, Liangyong Wang, Qionghai Dai, Tianyou Chai, and Yebin Liu. Light field image processing: An overview. IEEE Jour- nal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 11(7):926–954,

  44. [52]

    A real-time distributed light field camera

    Jason C Yang, Matthew Everett, Chris Buehler, and Leonard McMillan. A real-time distributed light field camera. Ren- dering Techniques, 2002(77-86):2, 2002. 2, 4

    2002

  45. [53]

    Eventps: Real-time photometric stereo using an event camera

    Bohan Yu, Jieji Ren, Jin Han, Feishi Wang, Jinxiu Liang, and Boxin Shi. Eventps: Real-time photometric stereo using an event camera. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 9602– 9611, 2024. 3

    2024

  46. [54]

    A survey for light field super- resolution

    Mingyuan Zhao, Hao Sheng, Da Yang, Sizhe Wang, Ruixuan Cong, Zhenglong Cui, Rongshan Chen, Tun Wang, Shuai Wang, Yang Huang, et al. A survey for light field super- resolution. High-Confidence Computing , page 100206,

  47. [55]

    Event-based motion segmentation with spatio- temporal graph cuts

    Yi Zhou, Guillermo Gallego, Xiuyuan Lu, Siqi Liu, and Shaojie Shen. Event-based motion segmentation with spatio- temporal graph cuts. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, 34(8):4868–4880, 2021. 2 Event fields: Capturing light fields at high speed, resolut...

    2021

  48. [56]

    One way to achieve this is to syn- chronize the event clock with the signal sent to the Gal- vanometer

    Calibration details for galvanometer setup The galvanometer scans on a Lissajous curve, and we need to register the exact location of the galvanometer corre- sponding to each event time stamp to know the light field view we are measuring. One way to achieve this is to syn- chr...

  49. [57]

    As mentioned in Sec

    Depth Calibration Details Event fields capture multi-view images and hence capture true-depth information about the scene. As mentioned in Sec. 6.5, we use depth from focus to capture the depth of each pixel in the scene. The depth from focus gives us dis- parity (i.e., the si...

  50. [58]

    /results/

    Codes and Videos Along with this supplementary PDF, we provide additional materials to support and reproduce the results presented in the paper, including a short video summarizing the paper’s contributions, as well as the code and datasets used to gen- erate the results: • Im...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.