3 ms·
Mhhhhh, I'm a researcher in the field and I'd say it's a mostly inaccurate statement. The root-SIFT detectors and descriptors are still really good. If you try
by Rochetshipz 7y ago
Mhhhhh, I'm a researcher in the field and I'd say it's a mostly inaccurate statement. The root-SIFT detectors and descriptors are still really good. If you try to match images in different conditions (day/night), then CNN based approaches are OK.
Which one were you thinking about?
- johntiger1 7y agoI would argue more that SIFT was valuable in introducing a new paradigm of feature extraction/matching. It is a staple of many computer vision courses. But yes the main algorithm I'm sure is quite (practically) performant as well
- FRIEDCHICKEN 7y agoGMS feature matching trumps SIFT (and all other feature matchers) in just about every category including performance.