Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 77, Issue 17, pp 22965–22983 | Cite as

User-perceived quality aware adaptive streaming of 3D multi-view video plus depth over the internet

  • Nabin Kumar KarnEmail author
  • Hongli Zhang
  • Feng Jiang


Video streaming is a foremost and growing contributor in the ever increasing Internet traffic. Since last two decades, due to the enhancement in cameras and image processing technology, we have seen a shift towards multi-view plus depth (MVD) technology from traditional 2D and 3D video technology. This growth comes with deep changes in the Internet bandwidth, video coding and network technologies, which smoothed the mode for delivery of MVD content to end-users over the Internet. Since, MVD contains large amounts of data than single view video, it requires more bandwidth. It is a challenging task for network service provider to deliver such views with the best user’s Quality of Experience(QoE) in dynamic network condition. Also, Internet is known to be prone to packet loss, bandwidth variation, delay and network congestion, which may prevent video packets from being delivered on time. Besides that, different capabilities of end user’s devices in terms of computing power, display, and access link capacity are other challenges. As consequences, the viewing experiences of 3D videos may well degrade, if the quality-aware adaptation techniques are not deployed. In this article, our work concentrates to present a comprehensive analysis of a dynamic network environment for streaming of 3D MVD over Internet (HTTP). We analyzed the effect of different adaptation of decision strategies and formulated a new quality-aware adaptation technique. The proposed technique is promoting from layer based video coding in terms of transmitted views scalability. The results of MVD streaming experiment, using the proposed approach have shown that the video quality of perceptual 3D improves significantly, as an effect of proposed quality aware adaptation even in adverse network conditions.


3D multi-view video plus depth Adaptive streaming QoE MPEG-DASH Dynamic network environment 


  1. 1.
    (MPEG) IJSW (2010) Dynamic adaptive streaming over http. w11578,CD 23001–6, w11578, CD 23001–6. ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG11Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Apple Developer (2016) Apple HTTP live streaming.
  3. 3.
    Benzie P et al (2007) A survey of 3DTV displays: techniques and technologies. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 17(11):1647–1658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bosc E et al (2013) A study of depth/texture bit-rate allocation in multi-view video plus depth compression. annals of telecommunications-annales des télécommunications 68(11–12):615–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buchowicz A (2013) Video coding and transmission standards for 3D television — a survey. Opto-Electron Rev 21:39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chakareski J (2013) Adaptive multiview video streaming: challenges and opportunities. IEEE Commun Mag 51(5):94–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Simone F, Dufaux F (2013) Comparison of DASH adaptation strategies based on bitrate and quality signalling. In: Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP), 2013 I.E. 15th international workshop on. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    H.-H.-I. Fruanhofer (2013) HEVC 3D extension test model (3DV HTM) version 11.0. Available from:
  9. 9.
    Gao Y et al (2017) Event classification in microblogs via social tracking. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol (TIST) 8(3):35Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ho YS, Lee EK, Lee C (2008) Multiview video test sequence and camera parameters. Tech. Rep. MPEG2008/M15419 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11. Archamps, FranceGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Internet Information Service (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 (2005) Report of the subjective quality evaluation for MVC call for evidence. Tech. Rep. MPEG2005/N6999, Hong Kong, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    ITU-R Recommendation (2012) ITU-R BT.500–13, Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. Tech. RepGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacobson V (1998) Congestion avoidance and control. In: Proceeding of SIGCOMM ‘88. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 18(4):314–329Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kauff P et al (2007) Depth map creation and image-based rendering for advanced 3DTV services providing interoperability and scalability. Signal Process Image Commun 22(2):217–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuschnig R, Kofler I, Hellwagner H (2011) Evaluation of HTTP-based request-response streams for internet video streaming. In: Proceedings of the second annual ACM conference on Multimedia systems. ACMGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Li B, Li H, Li L, Zhang J (2012) Rate control by R-lambda model for HEVC. In: JCTVC-K0103, JCTVC of ISO/IEC and ITU-T, 11th Meeting, Shanghai, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miller K et al (2012) Adaptation algorithm for adaptive streaming over HTTP. In: Packet Video Workshop (PV), 2012 19th International. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Müller K et al (2013) 3D high-efficiency video coding for multi-view video and depth data. IEEE Trans Image Process 22(9):3366–3378MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ohm J-R et al (2012) Comparison of the coding efficiency of video coding standards—including high efficiency video coding (HEVC). IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 22(12):1669–1684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ozcinar C et al (2016) Adaptive delivery of immersive 3D multi-view video over the internet. Multimed Tools Appl 75(20):12431–12461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ozcinar C, Ekmekcioglu E, Kondoz A (2016) Quality-aware adaptive delivery of multi-view video. In: Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2016 I.E. International Conference on. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oztas B et al (2014) A rate adaptation approach for streaming multiview plus depth content. in Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), 2014 International Conference on. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Psannis KE, Hadjinicolaou MG, Krikelis A (2006) MPEG-2 streaming of full interactive content. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 16(2):280–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rizzo L (1997) Dummynet: a simple approach to the evaluation of network protocols. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 27(1):31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roodaki, H., M.R. Hashemi, and S. Shirmohammadi, (2012) A new methodology to derive objective quality assessment metrics for scalable multiview 3D video coding. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), 2012. 8(3s): p. 44Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Savas SS, Tekalp AM, Gurler CG (2011) Adaptive multi-view video streaming over P2P networks considering quality of experience. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM workshop on social and behavioural networked media access. ACMGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schierl T et al (2012) System layer integration of high efficiency video coding. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 22(12):1871–1884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Seufert M et al (2015) A survey on quality of experience of HTTP adaptive streaming. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 17(1):469–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shimizu S et al (2007) View scalable multiview video coding using 3-d warping with depth map. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 17(11):1485–1495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Smolic A et al (2007) Coding Algorithms for 3DTV—A Survey. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 17(11):1606–1621MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Smolic A et al (2008) Intermediate view interpolation based on multiview video plus depth for advanced 3D video systems. In: Image Processing, 2008. ICIP 2008. 15th IEEE International Conference on. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sodagar I (2011) The MPEG-DASH standard for multimedia streaming over the internet. IEEE MultiMedia 18(4):62–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sripanidkulchai K, Maggs B, Zhang H (2004) An analysis of live streaming workloads on the internet. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on internet measurement. ACMGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stockhammer T (2011) Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP--: standards and design principles. In: Proceedings of the second annual ACM conference on Multimedia systems. ACMGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sullivan GJ et al (2012) Overview of the high efficiency video coding (HEVC) standard. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 22(12):1649–1668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tanimoto M (2009) Overview of FTV (free-viewpoint television). In: Proceeding of 2009 I.E. International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, New York, pp 1552–1523Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tanimoto M (2010) Overview of Free-viewpoint TV (FTV). In: Javidi B, Fournel T (eds) Information optics and photonics. Springer, New York.
  39. 39.
    Tanimoto M et al (2013) Proposal on a new activity for the third phase of FTV. In: the 105th meeting of MPEGGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Thang TC et al (2014) An evaluation of bitrate adaptation methods for HTTP live streaming. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 32(4):693–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    The official Microsoft IIS site (2016) Microsoft smooth-streaming. Microsoft Corporation 2016; Available from:
  42. 42.
    Toni L et al (2014) Optimal set of video representations in adaptive streaming. In: proceedings of the 5th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference. ACMGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Vetro A, Wiegand T, Sullivan GJ (2011) Overview of the stereo and multiview video coding extensions of the H. 264/MPEG-4 AVC standard. Proc IEEE 99(4):626–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wiegand T et al (2003) Overview of the H. 264/AVC video coding standard. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 13(7):560–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zhao S et al (2015) Strategy for dynamic 3D depth data matching towards robust action retrieval. Neurocomputing 151:533–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zhao S et al (2015) View-based 3D object retrieval via multi-modal graph learning. Signal Process 112:110–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zhao S, Yao H, Jiang X (2015) Predicting continuous probability distribution of image emotions in valence-arousal space. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on Multimedia. ACMGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zhao S et al (2016) Predicting personalized emotion perceptions of social images. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Multimedia Conference. ACMGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zhao S et al (2017) Continuous probability distribution prediction of image emotions via multitask shared sparse regression. IEEE Trans Multimedia 19(3):632–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhao S et al (2017) Approximating discrete probability distribution of image emotions by multi-modal features fusion. Transfer 1000:1Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhao S, Gao Y, Ding G, Chua TS (2017) Real-time multimedia social event detection in microblog. IEEE Trans on Cybernetics 99:1–14Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zhou C et al (2012) A control-theoretic approach to rate adaptation for dynamic HTTP streaming. In: Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP), 2012 IEEE. IEEEGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and TechnologyHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations