Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Visual Quality Assessment of Synthesized Views in the Context of 3D-TV

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

Abstract

Depth-image-based rendering (DIBR) is fundamental to 3D-TV applications because the generation of new viewpoints is recurrent. Like any tool, DIBR methods are subject to evaluations, thanks to the assessment of the visual quality of the resulting generated views. This assessment task is peculiar because DIBR can be used for different 3D-TV applications: either in a 2D context (Free Viewpoint Television, FTV), or in a 3D context (3D displays reproducing stereoscopic vision). Depending on the context, the factors affecting the visual experience may differ. This chapter concerns the case of the use of DIBR in the 2D context. It addresses two particular cases of use: visualization of still images and visualization of video sequences, in FTV in the 2D context. Through these two cases, the main issues of DIBR are presented in terms of visual quality assessment. Two experiments are proposed as case studies addressing the problematic of this chapter: the first one concerns the assessment of still images and the second one concerns the video sequence assessment. The two experiments question the reliability of subjective and objective usual tools when assessing the visual quality of synthesized views in a 2D context.

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. Smolic A et al (2006) 3D video and free viewpoint video-technologies, applications and mpeg standards. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (ICME’06), pp 2161–2164

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fehn C (2004) Depth-image-based rendering (DIBR), compression and transmission for a new approach on 3D-TV. In: Proceedings of SPIE stereoscopic displays and virtual reality systems XI, vol 5291, pp 93–104

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bosc E et al (2011) Towards a new quality metric for 3-D synthesized view assessment. IEEE J Sel Top in Sign Proces 5(7):1332–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. De Silva DVS et al (2010) Intra mode selection method for depth maps of 3D video based on rendering distortion modeling. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 56(4):2735–2740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Köppel M et al (2010) Temporally consistent handling of disocclusions with texture synthesis for depth-image-based rendering. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), Hong Kong, China

    Google Scholar 

  6. Meesters M et al (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 

  7. Boev A et al (2011) Classification of stereoscopic artefacts. Mobile3DTV project report, available online at http://mobile3dtv.eu/results

  8. Yuen M et al (1998) A survey of hybrid MC/DPCM/DCT video coding distortions. Sign Process 70(3):247–278

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Yasakethu SLP et al (2008) Quality analysis for 3D video using 2D video quality models. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 54(4):1969–1976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tikanmaki A et al (2008) Quality assessment of 3D video in rate allocation experiments. In: IEEE international symposium on consumer electronics, 14–16 April, Algarve, Portugal

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hewage CTER et al (2009) Quality evaluation of color plus depth map-based stereoscopic video. IEEE J Sel Top Sign Proces 3(2):304–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. You J et al (2010) Perceptual quality assessment for stereoscopic images based on 2D image quality metrics and disparity analysis. In: Proceedings of international workshop video processing and quality metrics, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fehn C (2004) Depth-image-based rendering (DIBR), compression and transmission for a new approach on 3D-TV. In: Proceedings of SPIE conference on stereoscopic displays and virtual reality systems X, San Jose, USA

    Google Scholar 

  14. Telea A (2004) An image inpainting technique based on the fast marching method. J Graph GPU Game Tools 9(1):23–34

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tanimoto M et al (2008) Reference softwares for depth estimation and view synthesis. In: Presented at the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 MPEG 2008/M15377

    Google Scholar 

  16. Müller K et al (2008) View synthesis for advanced 3D video systems. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing, vol 2008

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ndjiki-Nya P et al (2010) Depth image based rendering with advanced texture synthesis. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (ICME), Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  18. ITU-R BT (1993) 500, Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures, November 1993

    Google Scholar 

  19. MetriX MuX Home Page [Online]. Available at http://foulard.ece.cornell.edu/gaubatz/metrix_mux/. Accessed on 18 Jan 2011

  20. ITU-T (2008) Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. Geneva, Recommendation P 910, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  21. Barkowsky M (2009) Subjective and objective video quality measurement in low-bitrate multimedia scenarios. ISBN: 978-3-86853-142-8, Verlag Dr. Hut, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  22. Brotherton MD et al (2006) Subjective multimedia quality assessment. IEICE Trans Fundam Electron Commun Comp Sci ES E SERIES A 89(11):2920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rouse DM et al (2010) Tradeoffs in subjective testing methods for image and video quality assessment. Human Vision and Electronic Imaging XV, vol 7527, p 75270F

    Google Scholar 

  24. Huynh-Thu Q et al (2011) Study of rating scales for subjective quality assessment of high-definition video. IEEE Trans Broadcast, pp 1–14, Mar 2011

    Google Scholar 

  25. Handley JC (2001) Comparative analysis of Bradley-Terry and Thurstone-Mosteller paired comparison models for image quality assessment. In: IS and TS PICS conference, pp 108–112

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pinson M et al (2003) Comparing subjective video quality testing methodologies. In: SPIE video communications and image processing conference, Lugano, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  27. Péchard S (2008) Qualité d’usage en télévision haute définition: évaluations subjectives et métriques objectives

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bosc E et al (2010) Focus on visual rendering quality through content-based depth map coding. In: Proceedings of picture coding symposium (PCS), Nagoya, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ebrahimi T et al (2004) JPEG vs. JPEG2000: an objective comparison of image encoding quality. In: Proceedings of SPIE, 2004, vol 5558, pp 300–308

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wang Z et al (2002) A universal image quality index. IEEE Sign Process Lett 9(3):81–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sheikh HR et al (2005) An information fidelity criterion for image quality assessment using natural scene statistics. IEEE Trans Image Process 14(12):2117–2128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pinson MH et al (2004) A new standardized method for objectively measuring video quality. IEEE Trans Broadcast 50(3):312–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang Y (2006) Survey of objective video quality measurements. EMC Corporation Hopkinton, MA, vol 1748

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hekstra AP et al (2002) PVQM-A perceptual video quality measure. Sign Process Image Commun 17(10):781–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Z et al (2004) Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process 13(4):600–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wang Z et al (2004) Video quality assessment based on structural distortion measurement. Sign Process Image Commun 19(2):121–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Seshadrinathan K et al (2010) Motion tuned spatio-temporal quality assessment of natural videos. IEEE Trans Image Process 19(2):335–350

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Boev A et al (2009) Modelling of the stereoscopic HVS

    Google Scholar 

  39. Yang J et al (1994) Spatiotemporal separability in contrast sensitivity. Vision Res 34(19):2569–2576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Winkler S (2005) Digital video quality: vision models and metrics. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  41. Egiazarian K et al (2006) New full-reference quality metrics based on HVS. In: CD-ROM proceedings of the second international workshop on video processing and quality metrics, Scottsdale, USA

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ponomarenko N et al (2007) On between-coefficient contrast masking of DCT basis functions. In: CD-ROM proceedings of the third international workshop on video processing and quality metrics, vol 4

    Google Scholar 

  43. Chandler DM et al (2007) VSNR: a wavelet-based visual signal-to-noise ratio for natural images. IEEE Trans Image Process 16(9):2284–2298

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Damera-Venkata N et al (2002) Image quality assessment based on a degradation model. IEEE Trans Image Process 9(4):636–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sheikh HR et al (2006) Image information and visual quality. IEEE Trans Image Process 15(2):430–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Van C et al (1996) Perceptual quality measure using a spatio-temporal model of the human visual system

    Google Scholar 

  47. Video Quality Research (2011) [Online]. Available at http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/vqm/. Accessed on 19 Jul 2011

  48. VQEG 3DTV Group (2010) VQEG 3DTV test plan for crosstalk influences on user quality of experience, 21 Oct 2010

    Google Scholar 

  49. Engelke U et al (2011) Towards a framework of inter-observer analysis in multimedia quality assessment

    Google Scholar 

  50. Haber M et al (2006) Coefficients of agreement for fixed observers. Stat Methods Med Res 15(3):255

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  51. Seuntiens P (2006) Visual experience of 3D TV. Doctoral thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology

    Google Scholar 

  52. ITU (2000) Subjective assessment of stereoscopic television pictures. In: Recommandation ITU-R BT, p 1438

    Google Scholar 

  53. Chen W et al (2010) New requirements of subjective video quality assessment methodologies for 3DTV. In: Fifth international workshop on video processing and quality metrics for consumer electronics—VPQM 2010, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA

    Google Scholar 

  54. Joveluro P et al (2010) Perceptual video quality metric for 3D video quality assessment. In: 3DTV-conference: the true vision-capture, transmission and display of 3D video (3DTV-CON), pp 1–4

    Google Scholar 

  55. Zhao Y et al (2010) A perceptual metric for evaluating quality of synthesized sequences in 3DV system. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 7744, p 77440X

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ekmekcioglu E et al (2010) Depth based perceptual quality assessment for synthesized camera viewpoints. In: Proceedings of second international conference on user centric media, UCMedia 2010, Palma de Mallorca

    Google Scholar 

  57. Yasakethu SLP et al (2011) A compound depth and image quality metric for measuring the effects of packet loss on 3D video. In: Proceedings of 17th international conference on digital signal processing, Corfu, Greece

    Google Scholar 

  58. Solh M et al (2011) 3VQM: a vision-based quality measure for DIBR-based 3D videos. In: IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (ICME) 2011, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the experts who provided the synthesized sequences of the presented experiments, as well as the algorithms specifications: Martin Köppel and Patrick Ndjiki-Nya, from the Fraunhofer Institut for Telecommunications, HHI (Berlin).

We would like to acknowledge the Interactive Visual Media Group of Microsoft Research for providing the Breakdancers data set, the MPEG Korea Forum for providing the Lovebird1 data set, the GIST for providing the Newspaper data set, and HHI for providing Book Arrival.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IETR UMR CNRS 6164, INSA de Rennes, 35708, RENNES CEDEX 7, France

    Emilie Bosc, Luce Morin & Muriel Pressigout

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

    Patrick Le Callet

Authors
  1. Emilie Bosc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick Le Callet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luce Morin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Muriel Pressigout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emilie Bosc .

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

Bosc, E., Le Callet, P., Morin, L., Pressigout, M. (2013). Visual Quality Assessment of Synthesized Views in the Context of 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_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9964-1_15

  • 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