Time-of-flight cameras are widely adopted in a variety of indoor applications ranging from industrial object measurement to human activity recognition. However, the available products may differ in terms of the quality of the acquired point cloud, and the datasheet provided by the constructors may not be enough to guide researchers in the choice of the perfect device for their application. Hence, this work details the experimental procedure to assess time-of-flight cameras' error sources that should be considered when designing an application involving time-of-flight technology, such as the bias correction and the temperature influence on the point cloud stability. This is the first step towards a standardization of the metrological characterization procedure that could ensure the robustness and comparability of the results among tests and different devices. The procedure was conducted on Kinect Azure, Basler Blaze 101, and Basler ToF 640 cameras. Moreover, we compared the devices in the task of 3D reconstruction following a procedure involving the measure of both an object and a human upper-body-shaped mannequin. The experiment highlighted that, despite the results of the previously conducted metrological characterization, some devices showed evident difficulties in reconstructing the target objects. Thus, we proved that performing a rigorous evaluation procedure similar to the one proposed in this paper is always necessary when choosing the right device.
Keywords: Azure Kinect; Basler Blaze 101; human-body reconstruction; machine vision; metrological characterization; time-of-flight.