Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Content format and quality of experience in virtual reality

  • 1161: Multimedia Alternate Realities
  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate three forms of virtual reality (VR) content production and consumption. Namely, pre-rendered 360 stereoscopic video, full real-time rendered 3D scenes, and the combination of a real-time rendered 3D environment with a pre-rendered video billboard used to present the central elements of the scene. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these content formats and describe the production of a piece of VR cinematic content for the three formats. The cinematic segment presented the interaction between two actors, which the VR user could watch from the virtual room next-door, separated from the action by a one-way mirror. To compare the three content formats, we carried out an experiment with 24 participants. In the experiment, we evaluated the quality of experience, including presence, simulation sickness and the participants’ assessment of content quality, for each of the three versions of the cinematic segment. We found that, in the context of our cinematic segment, combining video and 3D content produced the best experience. We discuss our results, including their limitations and the potential applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/arkit

References

  1. Alexiadis DS, Chatzitofis A, Zioulis N, Zoidi O, Louizis G, Zarpalas D, Daras P (2016) An integrated platform for live 3d human reconstruction and motion capturing. IEEE Trans Circ Syst Vid Technol 27(4):798–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anwar MS, Wang J, Ullah A, Khan W, Ahmad S, Fei Z (2020) Measuring quality of experience for 360-degree videos in virtual reality. Sci Chin Inform Sci 63(10):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boukhris M, Paljic A, Lafon-Pham D (2017) 360 versus 3d environments in vr headsets for an exploration task. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on artificial reality and telexistence and 22nd eurographics symposium on virtual environments, pp 71–78

  4. Cai S, Ch’ng E, Li Y (2018) A comparison of the capacities of vr and 360-degree video for coordinating memory in the experience of cultural heritage. In: 2018 3rd digital heritage international congress (DigitalHERITAGE) held jointly with 2018 24th international conference on virtual systems & multimedia (VSMM 2018), pp 1–4. IEEE

  5. De Simone F, Li J, Debarba HG, El Ali A, Gunkel SN, Cesar P (2019) Watching videos together in social virtual reality: an experimental study on user’s qoe. In: 2019 IEEE Conference on virtual reality and 3d user interfaces (VR), pp 890–891. IEEE

  6. Facebook spaces https://www.facebook.com/spaces. Accessed: 2019-02-19

  7. Fourquet E, Cowan W, Mann S (2007) On the empirical limits of billboard rotation. In: Proceedings of the 4th symposium on applied perception in graphics and visualization, pp 49–56. ACM

  8. Germann M, Hornung A, Keiser R, Ziegler R, Würmlin S, Gross M (2010) Articulated billboards for video-based rendering. In: Computer graphics forum, vol 29, pp 585–594. Wiley Online Library

  9. Gunkel SN, Prins M, Stokking H, Niamut O (2017) Social vr platform: building 360-degree shared vr spaces. In: Adjunct publication of the 2017 ACM international conference on interactive experiences for tv and online video, pp 83–84

  10. Hamill J, McDonnell R, Dobbyn S, O’Sullivan C (2005) Perceptual evaluation of impostor representations for virtual humans and buildings. In: Computer graphics forum, vol 24, pp 623–633. Wiley Online Library

  11. Hayashi K, Saito H (2006) Synthesizing free-viewpoing images from multiple view videos in soccer stadium. In: International conference on computer graphics, imaging and visualisation (CGIV’06), pp 220–225. IEEE

  12. Kalckert A, Ehrsson HH (2012) Moving a rubber hand that feels like your own: a dissociation of ownership and agency. Fronti Human Neurosci 6:40

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kennedy RS, Lane NE, Berbaum KS, Lilienthal MG (1993) Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int J Aviat Psychol 3(3):203–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. LaViola JJ Jr (2000) A discussion of cybersickness in virtual environments. ACM Sigchi Bull 32(1):47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Levoy M, Whitted T (1985) The use of points as display primitives. Technical Report. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Dept. of Computer Science

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mangiante S, Klas G, Navon A, GuanHua Z, Ran J, Silva MD (2017) Vr is on the edge: how to deliver 360 videos in mobile networks. In: Proceedings of the workshop on virtual reality and augmented reality network, pp 30–35

  17. Pece F, Steptoe W, Wanner F, Julier S, Weyrich T, Kautz J, Steed A (2013) Panoinserts: mobile spatial teleconferencing. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1319–1328

  18. Revilla A, Lacosta I, Calahorra G, García-Lajara J (2019) Deliverable D4.1 - first example of content EU H2020 VRTogether project. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3530496

  19. Slater M, Spanlang B, Corominas D (2010) Simulating virtual environments within virtual environments as the basis for a psychophysics of presence. In: ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG), vol 29, p 92. ACM

  20. Stanney K, Fidopiastis C, Foster L (2020) Virtual reality is sexist: but it does not have to be. Front Robot AI 7:4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Teo T, Lawrence L, Lee GA, Billinghurst M, Adcock M (2019) Mixed reality remote collaboration combining 360 video and 3d reconstruction. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1–14

  22. Usoh M, Catena E, Arman S, Slater M (2000) Using presence questionnaires in reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virt Environ 9(5):497–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wu TL, Gomes A, Fernandes K, Wang D (2019) The effect of head tracking on the degree of presence in virtual reality. Int J Human–Comput Interact 35(17):1569–1577

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Artanim Foundation, Chemin du Grand-Puits 40, 1217, Meyrin, Switzerland

    Henrique Galvan Debarba, Sylvain Chagué & Caecilia Charbonnier

  2. Aalborg University Copenhagen, A. C. Meyers Vænge 15, 2450, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Henrique Galvan Debarba

  3. Universitat de València, Av. de Blasco Ibáñez 13, 46010, Valencia, Spain

    Mario Montagud

  4. Fundació i2CAT, Carrer del Gran Capità 2, 08034, Barcelona, Spain

    Mario Montagud & Sergi Fernandez Langa

  5. Overlat, Calle Merce Rodoreda 2, San Sebastian de los Reyes, 28702, Madrid, Spain

    Javier Garcia-Lajara Herrero

  6. The Mo (The Modern Cultural Productions), Espoz y Mina N4, 50003, Zaragoza, Spain

    Javier Garcia-Lajara Herrero & Ignacio Lacosta

Authors
  1. Henrique Galvan Debarba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Montagud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sylvain Chagué
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Javier Garcia-Lajara Herrero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ignacio Lacosta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sergi Fernandez Langa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Caecilia Charbonnier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henrique Galvan Debarba.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This work was funded by the European Commission as part of the H2020 program, under the grant agreement 762111, VRTogether.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Debarba, H.G., Montagud, M., Chagué, S. et al. Content format and quality of experience in virtual reality. Multimed Tools Appl 83, 46481–46506 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-12176-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-12176-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation