Subjective Image-Quality Estimation Based on Psychophysical Experimentation

  • Gi-Yeong Gim
  • Hyunchul Kim
  • Jin-Aeon Lee
  • Whoi-Yul Kim
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4872)


The purpose of estimating subjective image quality is to provide best-quality image content to users in diverse fields. Image quality is subjective, therefore very difficult to estimate accurately, and so many researchers have proposed psychophysical experimentation as a means of estimating it. Conventional methods describe the relationship between the subjective preference and the perceived contrast as an “inverted U” shape. However, the relationship was resulted from only a few, high-quality images. Thus, they are inadequate for general image-quality estimation. In this paper, we carried out two experiments using a dataset with untransformed and various images. We discovered an important property that the preference increases in proportion to the perceived contrast. The result shows us not only that our experimentation can reduce MSE of image-quality estimation by approximately 40% over the previous methods, but also that it can be applied in various applications.


Image quality Psychophysical experimentation Subjective quality model 


  1. 1.
    Calabria, A.J., Fairchild, M.D.: Perceived image contrast and observer preference I. The effects of lightness, chroma, and sharpness manipulations on contrast perception. Journal of Imaging Science and Technology 47, 479–493 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Calabria, A.J., Fairchild, M.D.: Perceived image contrast and observer preference II. Empirical modeling of perceived image contrast and observer preference data. Journal of Imaging Science and Technology 47, 494–508 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim, J.-S., Cho, M.-S., Koo, B.-K.: Experimental Approach for Human Perception Based Image Quality Assessment. In: Harper, R., Rauterberg, M., Combetto, M. (eds.) ICEC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4161, pp. 59–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brotherton, M.D., Huynh-Thu, Q., Hands, D.S., Brunnstrom, K.: Subjective Multimedia Quality Assessment. IEICE Trans. Fundamentals E89-A, 2920–2931 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ke, Y., Tang, X., Jing, F.: The Design of High-Level Features for Photo Quality Assessment. In: Proc. of IEEE Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 419–426. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Horita, Y., Sato, M., Kawayoke, Y., Parvez Sazzad, Z.M., Shibata, K.: Image Quality Evaluation Model Based on Local Features and Segmentation. In: Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, pp. 405–408. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gonzalez, R.C., Woods, R.E.: Digital Image Processing, 2/E. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Akyuz, A.O., Reinhard, E.: Color appearance in high-dynamic-range imaging. Journal of Electronic Imaging 15(3), 033001 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jourlin, M., Pinoli, J.C.: Image dynamic range enhancement and stabilization in the context of the logarithmic image processing model. Signal Processing 41(2), 225–237 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buerkle, A., Schmoeckel, F., Kiefer, M., Amavasai, B.P., Caparreli, F., Selvan, A., Travis, J.R.: Vision-based closed-loop control of mobile microbots for microhandling tasks. Proc. SPIE 4568, 187–198 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gi-Yeong Gim
    • 1
  • Hyunchul Kim
    • 1
  • Jin-Aeon Lee
    • 2
  • Whoi-Yul Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Computer Engineering, Hanyang University, Haengdang-Dong, Sungdong-Gu, Seoul, 133-792Korea
  2. 2.Samsung Electronics, Giheung-Eup, Yongin-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 449-712Korea

Personalised recommendations