Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Subjective and Objective Visual Quality Assessment in the Context of Stereoscopic 3D-TV

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
3D-TV System with Depth-Image-Based Rendering

Abstract

Subjective and objective visual quality assessment in the context of stereoscopic three-dimensional TV (3D-TV) is still in the nascent stage and needs to consider the effect of the added depth dimension. As a matter of fact, quality assessment of 3D-TV cannot be considered as a trivial extension of two-dimensional (2D) cases. Furthermore, it may also introduce negative effects not experienced in 2D, e.g., discomfort or nausea. Based on efforts initiated within the cost action ICT 1003 QUALINET, this chapter discusses current challenges in relation to subjective and objective visual quality assessment for stereo-based 3D-TV. Two case studies are presented to illustrate the current state of the art and some of the remaining challenges.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Chikkerur S, Vijay S, Reisslein M, Karam LJ (2011) Objective video quality assessment methods: a classification, review, and performance comparison. IEEE Trans Broadcast 57(2):165–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. You J, Reiter U, Hannuksela MM, Gabbouj M, Perkis A (2010) Perceptual-based objective quality metrics for audio-visual services—a survey. Signal Process Image Commun 25(7):482–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Huynh-Thu Q, Le Callet P, Barkowsky M (2010) Video quality assessment: from 2D to 3D—challenges and future trends. In: IEEE ICIP, pp. 4025–4028, Sept 2010

    Google Scholar 

  4. Mendiburu B (2009) 3D movie making: stereoscopic digital cinema from script to screen. Focal Press, Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  5. Zilly F, Muller M, Eisert P, Kauff P (2010) The stereoscopic analyzer-an image-based assistance tool for stereo shooting and 3D production. In: IEEE ICIP, pp 4029–4032, Sept 2010

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pastoor S (1991) 3D-television: a survey of recent research results on subjective requirements. Signal Process Image Commun 4(1):21–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vetro A, Wiegand T, Sullivan G (2011) Overview of the stereo and multiview video coding extensions of the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC standard. Proc IEEE 99:626–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yamagishi K, Karam L, Okamoto J, Hayashi T (2011) Subjective characteristics for stereoscopic high definition video. In: IEEE QoMEX, Sept 2011

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kima D, Mina D, Ohab J, Jeonb S, Sohna K (2009) Depth map quality metric for three-dimensional video. Image, 5(6):7

    Google Scholar 

  10. Campisi P, Le Callet P, Marini E (2007) Stereoscopic images quality assessment. In: Proceedings of 15th European signal processing conference (EUSIPCO)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Benoit A, Le Callet P, Campisi P, Cousseau R (2008) Quality assessment of stereoscopic images. EURASIP J Image Video Process 2008:13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gorley P, Holliman N (2008) Stereoscopic image quality metrics and compression. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 6803

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lu F, Wang H, Ji X, Er G (2009) Quality assessment of 3D asymmetric view coding using spatial frequency dominance model. In: IEEE 3DTV conference, pp 1–4

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sazzad Z, Yamanaka S, Kawayokeita Y, Horita Y (2009) Stereoscopic image quality prediction. In: IEEE QoMEX, pp 180–185

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sazzad Z, Yamanaka S, Horita Y (2010) Spatio-temporal segmentation based continuous no-reference stereoscopic video quality prediction. In: International workshop on quality of multimedia experience, pp 106–111

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ekmekcioglu E, Worrall S, De Silva D, Fernando W, Kondoz A (2010) Depth based perceptual quality assesment for synthesized camera viewpoints. In: Second international conference on user centric media, Sept 2010

    Google Scholar 

  17. Boev A, Hollosi D, Gotchev A, Egiazarian K (2009) Classification and simulation of stereoscopic artifacts in mobile 3DTV content. In: Proceedings of SPIE, pp 72371F-12

    Google Scholar 

  18. Woods A, Docherty T, Koch R (1993) Image distortions in stereoscopic video systems. In: Proceedings of SPIE, San Jose, pp 36–48

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meesters LMJ, Ijsselsteijn WA, Seuntiëns PJH (2004) A survey of perceptual evaluations and requirements of three-dimensional TV. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 14(3):381–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Seuntiens PJH, Meesters LMJ, IJsselsteijn WA (2005) Perceptual attributes of crosstalk in 3D images. Displays 26(4-5):177–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pastoor S (1995) Human factors of 3D images: results of recent research at Heinrich-Hertz-Institut Berlin. In: International display workshop, vol 3, pp 69–72

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lipton L (1987) Factors affecting ‘ghosting’ in time-multiplexed plano-stereoscopic CRT display systems. In: True 3D imaging techniques and display technologies, vol 761, pp 75–78

    Google Scholar 

  23. Huang KC, Yuan JC, Tsai CH et al (2003) A study of how crosstalk affects stereopsis in stereoscopic displays. In: Stereoscopic displays and virtual reality systems X, vol 5006, pp 247–253

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kooi FL, Toet A (2004) Visual comfort of binocular and 3D displays. Displays 25:99–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Woods A (2011) How are crosstalk and ghosting defined in the stereoscopic literature. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 7863, p 78630Z

    Google Scholar 

  26. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, M15377, M15378, M15413, M15419, Archamps, France, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  27. Boev A, Hollosi D, Gotchev A Software for simulation of artefacts and database of impaired videos. Mobile3DTV Project report, no. 216503, [available] http://mobile3dtv.eu

  28. Xing L, You J, Ebrahimi T, Perkis A (2011) Assessment of stereoscopic crosstalk perception. IEEE Transaction on Multimedia, no 99, p 1

    Google Scholar 

  29. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tanimoto M, Fujii T, Suzuki K et al (2008) Reference softwares for depth estimation and view synthesis. In: ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 MPEG2008/M15377, Archamps, France

    Google Scholar 

  31. Barkowsky M, Wang K, Cousseau R, Brunnström K, Olsson R, Le Callet P (2010) Subjective quality assessment of error concealment strategies for 3DTV in the presence of asymmetric Transmission Errors. In: IEEE packet video workshop, pp 193–200

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wang K, Barkowsky M, Cousseau R, Brunnström K, Olsson R, Le Callet P et al (2011) Subjective evaluation of HDTV stereoscopic videos in IPTV scenarios using absolute category rating. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 7863

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lebreton P, Raake A, Barkowsky M, Le Callet P (2011) A subjective evaluation of 3D IPTV broadcasting implementations considering coding and transmission degradation. In: IEEE international workshop on multimedia quality of experience: modeling, evaluation and directions, pp 506–511

    Google Scholar 

  34. ITU-T Study Group 12 (1997) ITU-T P.910 subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zielinski S, Rumsey F, Bech S (2008) On some biases encountered in modern audio quality listening tests-a review. J AES 56(6):427–451

    Google Scholar 

  36. Huynh-Thu Q, Garcia M-N, Speranza F, Corriveau PJ, Raake A (2011) Study of rating scales for subjective quality assessment of high-definition video. IEEE Trans Broadcast 57(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Webster A, Speranza F (2008) Final report from the video quality experts group on the validation of objective models of multimedia quality assessment, phase I. http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/vqeg/projects/multimedia/, ITU Study Group 9, TD 923

  38. Webster A, Speranza F (2010) Video quality experts group: report on the validation of video quality models for high definition video content. http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/vqeg/projects/hdtv/, version 2.0, 30 June 2010

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the COST IC1003 European Network on QoE in Multimedia Systems and Services—QUALINET (http://www.qualinet.eu/).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LUNAM Université, Université de Nantes, IRCCyN UMR CNRS 6597, Polytech Nantes, 44306, Nantes Cedex 3, France

    Marcus Barkowsky & Patrick Le Callet

  2. Department of NetLab, Acreo AB, Electrum 236, SE 16440, Kista, Sweden

    Kjell Brunnström & Kun Wang

  3. Multimedia Signal Processing Group (MMSPG), Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), EPFL STI IEL GR-EB, CH-1015, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Touradj Ebrahimi

  4. School of ECEE, Arizona State University, MC 5706, Tempe, AZ, 85287-5706, USA

    Lina Karam & Mahesh Subedar

  5. Assessment of IP-Based Applications, Telekom Innovation Laboratories, TU Berlin, Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, 10587, Berlin, Germany

    Pierre Lebreton & Alexander Raake

  6. Centre for Quantifiable Quality of Service (Q2S) in Communication Systems, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), N-7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Andrew Perkis, Liyuan Xing & Junyong You

  7. Intel Corporation and Arizona State University, Chandler, AZ, 85226, USA

    Mahesh Subedar

  8. Department of Information Technology and Media (ITM), Mid Sweden University, Holmgatan 10, 85170, Sundsvall, Sweden

    Kun Wang

Authors
  1. Marcus Barkowsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kjell Brunnström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Touradj Ebrahimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lina Karam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pierre Lebreton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Patrick Le Callet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrew Perkis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Alexander Raake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mahesh Subedar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Liyuan Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Junyong You
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Le Callet .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , School of Electrical & Electronic, Nanyang Technological University, Nanyang Avenue 50, Singapore, 639798, Singapore

    Ce Zhu

  2. Electronic Engineering, Department of Information Science &, Zheda Road 38, Hangzhou, 310027, China, People's Republic

    Yin Zhao

  3. , Department of Information Science &, Zhejiang University, Zheda Road 38, Hangzhou, 310027, China, People's Republic

    Lu Yu

  4. Graduate School of Engineering, Department of Electrical Engineering and, Nagoya University, Nagoya, 464-8603, Japan

    Masayuki Tanimoto

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Barkowsky, M. et al. (2013). Subjective and Objective Visual Quality Assessment in the Context of Stereoscopic 3D-TV. In: Zhu, C., Zhao, Y., Yu, L., Tanimoto, M. (eds) 3D-TV System with Depth-Image-Based Rendering. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9964-1_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9964-1_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-9963-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-9964-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation