The orthographic projection approach, where we assume that 3D points leave their

Question

The orthographic projection approach, where we assume that 3D points leave their imprint on the 2D image plane we are trying to reconstruct via a perpendicular projection on its plane, is not quite compatible with the way human vision (or cameras, really) work. Perspective projection is more faithful to how cameras or eyes work ... nevertheless, can you think of any benefits (practical or computational) to using orthographic projection as one of the options? Are there some cases where the difference between orthographic and perspective projection might not be so severe?

Explanation / Answer

The orthographic projection approach is widely used in many contexts. It is not always good to use perceptive vision. For example, if we consider a sphere in which there is a cuboidal cavity, one cannot find say using perceptive vision that there is a cavity or not, but by 2d orthographic projection diagram we can do it.
when we consider drawing a map on a street. It is easy to understand and use plan / top view of the 2d orthographic projection rather than perceptive projection.
So, It is definitely a good option to use orthographic views as it simplies our life although many a times perceptive projection gives more information.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.