Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
well-known 2D image quality metrics, including SSIM, MSSIM, VSNR, VIF,
UQI, IFC, NQM, WSNR, PHVS, and JND model, in the stereoscopic image qual-
ity assessment. The experimental results indicated that 2D image quality metrics
can not be adopted in evaluating the stereoscopic image quality directly. Further-
more, as an important factor in stereopsis, the disparity was taken into account in
the stereoscopic image quality assessment. The experimental results demonstrated
the promising performance by using the disparity information in evaluating the
stereoscopic quality, and the best performance can be achieved when the disparity
information and the original image are combined appropriately.
Although some tentative work on developing objective quality metrics for
stereoscopic images has been done in the literature and this chapter, we are still a
long way from 3D quality metrics that are widely applicable and universally rec-
ognized. The future work is to understand the fundamental of 3D presentation im-
pact on the human visual and perceptual system. Determining how to model such
impact and the relationship between the characteristics of 3D presentations and
quality assessment is another critical issue for evaluating the quality of visual
experience in 3D visual presentations.
References
1.
Meesters, L.M.J., Ijsselsteijn, W.A., Seuntiëns, P.J.H.: A survey of perceptual evalua-
tion and requirements of three-dimensional TV. IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems for
Video Technology 14(3), 381-391 (2004)
2.
Tam, W.J., Stelmach, L.B., Corriveau, P.J.: Psychovisual aspects of viewing stereo-
scopic video sequences. In: Proc. SPIE Stereoscopic Displays and Virtual Reality Sys-
tem V, San Jose, CA, USA (1998)
3.
Pastoor, S.: Human factors of 3D displays in advanced image communications. Dis-
plays 14(3), 150-157 (1993)
4.
Stelmach, L., Tam, W.J., Meegan, D., Vincent, A.: Stereo image quality: effects of
spatio-temporal resolution. IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems for Video Technol-
ogy 10(2), 188-193 (2000)
5.
Ijsselsteijn, W.A., de, R.H., Vliegen, J.: Subjective evaluation of stereoscopic images:
effects of camera parameters and display duration. IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems
for Video Technology 10(2), 225-233 (2000)
6.
Meegan, D.V.: Unequal weighting of monocular inputs in binocular combination: im-
plications for the compression of stereoscopic imagery. Journal Experimental Psychol-
ogy: Applied 7(2), 143-153 (2001)
7.
Seuntiens, P., Meesters, L., Ljsselsteijn, A.: Perceived quality of compressed stereo-
scopic images: Effects of symmetric and asymmetric JPEG coding and camera separa-
tion. ACM Trans. Applied Perception 3(2), 95-109 (2006)
8.
Kalva, H., Christodoulou, L., Mayron, L.M., Marques, O., Furht, B.: Design and
evaluation of a 3D video system based on H.264 view coding. In: Proc. ACM Network
and operating systems support for digital audio and video, Newport, Rhode Island,
USA (2006)
9.
Woods, A., Docherty, T., Koch, R.: Image distortions in stereoscopic video systems.
In: Proc. SPIE Stereoscopic Displays and Applications IV, San Jose, CA, USA (1993)
