Advertisement

Subjective Evaluation of Light Field Images for Quality Assessment Database

  • Liang Shan
  • Ping AnEmail author
  • Deyang Liu
  • Ran Ma
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 815)

Abstract

Light filed imaging is becoming popular for its diversity of post-processing and a wide range of applications. Various kinds of research about light field such as light field compression methods are coming out one after the other in recent years. For better evaluation of the quality of light field images and the performance of compression algorithm, the study on quality assessment of light field is in desperate need. In this paper, in order to establish a light field quality assessment database for the subsequent research, we propose a methodology of subjective evaluation for light field image and use a 2D objective evaluation method to verify the methodology. Results show that this methodology can be successfully used to assess the quality of light field content.

Keywords

Light field Compression algorithm Quality assessment Subjective evaluation 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants 61571285 and U1301257, Construction Program of Shanghai Engineering Research Center under Grant 16dz2251300, and Shanghai Science and Technology Commission under Grant 17DZ2292400.

References

  1. 1.
    Conti, C., Soares, L.D., Nunes, P.: HEVC-based 3D holoscopic video coding using self-similarity compensated prediction. Signal Process. Image Commun. 42, 59–78 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gershun, A.: The light field. J. Math. Phys. 18, 51–151 (1939). MoscowCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adelson, E.H., Bergen, J.R.: The plenoptic function and the elements of early vision (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Levoy, M., Hanrahan, P.: Light field rendering. In: Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pp. 31–42. ACM (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones, A., McDowall, I., Yamada, H., et al.: Rendering for an interactive 360 light field display. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 26(3), 40 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dansereau, D.G., Pizarro, O., Williams, S.B.: Decoding, calibration and rectification for lenselet-based plenoptic cameras. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1027–1034 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC29/WG1 JPEG: “Grand challenge on light field image compression,” Doc. M72022, Geneva, Switzerland, June 2016Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu, D., Wang, L., Li, L., et al.: Pseudo-sequence-based light field image compression. In: IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops, pp. 1–4. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, D., An, P., Ma, R., et al.: 3D holoscopic image coding scheme using HEVC with Gaussian process regression. Signal Process. Image Commun. 47, 438–451 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu, D., An, P., Du, T., et al.: An Improved 3D Holoscopic Image Coding Scheme Using HEVC Based on Gaussian Mixture Models, pp. 276–285 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    An, P., Ma, R., Shen, L.: Three-dimensional holoscopic image coding scheme using high-efficiency video coding with kernel-based minimum mean-square-error estimation. J. Electron. Imaging 25(4), 043015 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, D., An, P., Ma, R., et al.: Scalable coding of 3D holoscopic image by using a sparse interlaced view image set and disparity map. Multimedia Tools Appl. 76, 1–23 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu, D., An, P., Yang, C., et al.: Coding of 3D holoscopic image by using spatial correlation of rendered view images. In: IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang, L., An, P., Liu, D., et al.: 3D Holoscopic Images Coding Scheme Based on Viewpoint Image Rendering (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Viola, I., Řeřábek, M., Bruylants, T., et al.: Objective and subjective evaluation of light field image compression algorithms. In: 2016 Picture Coding Symposium (PCS), pp. 1–5. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Viola, I., Rerabek, M., Ebrahimi, T.: A new approach to subjectively assess quality of plenoptic content. In: Applications of Digital Image Processing XXXIX, SPIE 2016, (EPFL-CONF-221562), vol. 9971, pp. 99710X-1–99710X-13 (206)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paudyal, P., Battisti, F., Sjöström, M., et al.: Toward the perceptual quality evaluation of compressed light field images. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 63(3), 507–522 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Viola, I., Řeřábek, M., Ebrahimi, T.: Impact of interactivity on the assessment of quality of experience for light field content. In: 2017 Ninth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Řeřábek, M., Yuan, L., Authier, L., et al.: EPFL light-field image dataset (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dansereau, D.G., Pizarro, O., Williams, S.B.: Linear volumetric focus for light field cameras. ACM Trans. Graph. 34(2), 15:1–15:20 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sheikh, H.R.: Image quality assessment using natural scene statistics (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Assembly I T U R.: Methodology for the Subjective Assessment of the Quality of Television Pictures. International Telecommunication Union (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Advanced Displays and System Application, Shanghai Institute for Advanced Communication and Data Science, Ministry of EducationShanghai UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.School of Computer and InformationAnqing Normal UniversityAnqingChina

Personalised recommendations