Abstract
In this chapter, a description of evaluation methods to quantify the quality of impaired still images is proposed. The presentation starts with an overview of the mainly subjective methods recommended by both the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and widely used by Video Quality Experts Group (VQEG). Then, the algorithmic measures are investigated. In this context, low-complexity metrics such as Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR) and Mean Squared Error (MSE) are first presented to finally reach perceptual metrics. The general scheme of these latter is based on the Human Visual System (HVS) and exploits many properties such as the luminance adaptation, the spatial frequency sensitivity, the contrast and the masking effects. The performance evaluation of the objective quality metrics follows a methodology that is described.
Blueness doth express trueness
Ben Jonson
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, London
Ardito M, Visca M (1996) Correlation between objective and subjective measurements for video compressed systems. SMPTE J 105(12):768–773
Barten P (1990) Evaluation of subjective image quality with the square-root integral method. J Opt Soc Am 7(10):2024–2031
Bechhofer RE, Santner TJ, Goldsman DM (1995) Design and analysis of experiments for statistical selection, screening and multiple comparisons. Wiley, New York
Bekkat N, Saadane (2004) A coded image quality assessment based on a new contrast masking model. J Electron Imag 2:341–348
Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37–46
Cook RJ (1998) Kappa. In: Armitage TP, Colton T (eds.) The encyclopedia of biostatistics, Wiley, New York, pp 2160–2166
Daly S (1992) The visible difference predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity. In: SPIE human vision, visual processing and digital display III, vol 1666. pp 2–15
David H (1988) The method of paired comparisons. Charles Griffin & Company, Ltd., London
Eckert MP, Bradley AP (1998) Perceptual quality metrics applied to still image compression. Signal Process 70:177–200
Eskicioglu AM, Fisher PS (1993) A survey of quality measures for gray scale image compression. In: AIAA, computing in aerospace 9, vol 939. pp 304–313
Eskicioglu M, Fisher PS (1995) Image quality measures and their performance. IEEE Trans Comm 43(12):2959–2965
Fales CL, Huck FO (1991) An information theory of image ghatering. Inform Sci 57–58: 245–285
Fleiss JL (1981) Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Wiley, New York
Foley JM (1994) Human luminance pattern mechanisms: masking experiments require a new model. J Opt Soc Am 11(6):1710–1719
Foley JM, Boynton GM (1994) A new model of human luminance pattern vision mechanisms: analysis of the effects of pattern orientation, spatial phase and temporal frequency. In: SPIE proceedings, vol 2054. San José, California, pp 32–42
Fontaine B, Saadane A (2004) Thomas a perceptual quality metrics: evaluation of individual components. In: International conference on image processing, Singapore, pp 24–27
Freeman WT, Adelson EH (1991) The design and use of steerable filters. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 13(9):891–906
Girod B (1993) What’s wrong with mean-squared error. In: Watson AB (ed.) Digital images and human vision, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 207-220
Hall CF, Hall F (1977) A nonlinear model for the spatial characteristics of the human visual system. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 7(3):161–170
Huck FO, Fales CL, Alter-Gartenberg R, Rahman ZU, Reichenbach SE (1993) Visual communication: information and fidelity. J Visual Commun Image Represent 4(1):62–78
Huck S, Cormier WH (1996) Reading statistics and research. Harper Collins, London
ISO 3664:2000 (2000) Viewing conditions-graphic technology and photography. Technical report, ISO, Geneva, Switzerland
ITU-R Recommendation BT.500–10: Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures (2000) Technical report, ITU, Geneva, Switzerland
Keelan BW (2002) Handbook of image quality: characterization and prediction. Dekker, New York, NY
Kendall MG (1975) Rank correlation methods. Charles Griffin & Company, Ltd., London
Landis J, Koch G (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174
Limb JO (1979) Distorsion criteria of the human viewer. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9(12):778–793
Linfoot EH (1958) Quality evaluation of optical systems. Optica Acta 5(1–2):1–13
Lubin J (1993) The use of psychophysical data and models in the analysis of display system performance. In: Watson A (ed.) Digital images and human vision, MIT, Cambridge, MA, pp 163–178
Macmillan NA, Creelman CD (1990) Detection theory: a user’s guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Mannos JL, Sakrison DJ (1974) The effects of visual fidelity criterion on the encoding of images. IEEE Trans Inform Theor 20(4):525–536
Miyahara M, Kotani K, Algazi VR (1998) Objective picture quality scale (PQS) for image 670 coding. IEEE Trans Comm 46(9):1215–1226
Pappas TN, Safranek RJ (2000) Perceptual criteria for image quality evaluation. In: Bovik, A (ed.) Handbook of image and video processing, Academic, pp 669–684
Pearson ES, Hartley HO (1966) Biometrika tables for statisticians, vol 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Peli E (1990) Contrast in complex images. J Opt Soc Am 7(10):2032–2040
Pelli DG (1990) The quantum efficiency of vision. In: Blakemore C (ed.) Vision: coding and efficiency, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–24
Reichenbach SE, Park SK, O’Brien GF, Howe JD (1992) Efficient high-resolution digital filtres for flir images. In: SPIE, Visual Information Processing, vol 1705. pp 165–176
Siegel S, Castellan NJ (1988) Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill, Boston
Silverstein DA, Farrell JE (1996) The relationship between image fidelity and image quality. In: IEEE international conference image processing, pp 881–884
Teo PC, Heeger DJ (1994) Perceptual image distortion. In: International conference on image processing, pp 982–986
Thurstone LL (1927) Psychophysical analysis. Am J Psych 38:368–389
VQEG: Final report from the video quality experts group on the validation of objective models of video quality assessment. Technical report, ITU-R. http://www.vqeg.org/
Wang Z, Bovik AC (2002) A universal image quality index. IEEE Signal Process Lett 9(3): 81–84
Wang Z, Bovik AC, Lu L (2002) Why is image quality assessment so difficult. In: Proceedings of ICASSP, Vol 4. Orlando, FL, pp 3313–3316
Wang Z, Bovik AC, Sheikh HR, Simoncelli EP (2004) Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process 13(4):600–612
Watson AB (1987) The cortex transform: Rapid computation of simulated neural images. Comput Vis Graph Image Process 39:311–327
Watson AB, Borthwick R, Taylor M (1997) Image quality and entropy masking. In: SPIE proceedings, vol 3016. San José, California pp 358–371
Watson AB, Solomon JA (1997) Model of visual contrast gain control and pattern masking. J Opt Soc Am 14(9):2379–2391
Winkler S (1999) A perceptual distortion metric for digital color images. In: SPIE proceedings, vol 3644. San José, California
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Larabi, MC., Charrier, C., Saadane, A. (2013). Quality Assessment of Still Images. In: Fernandez-Maloigne, C. (eds) Advanced Color Image Processing and Analysis. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6190-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6190-7_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-6189-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-6190-7
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)