Distortions of Space in Stereoscopic 3D Content

Benzeroual, Karim; Allison, Robert S.; Wilcox, Laurie M.

doi:10.5594/m001420

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By definition an object travelling at a constant velocity covers a constant real world distance per unit time. If the object approaches then this predicts that the object will appear to cover an increasing interval of stereoscopic space per unit time when captured with a small IA and hence appear to accelerate 9 . Conversely, an approaching object should appear to decelerate when captured with a large IA.…”

Section: Motion In Depth Cues In the Visual Systemmentioning

confidence: 97%

Motion in depth constancy in stereoscopic displays

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a stereoscopic 3D scene, non-linear mapping between real space and disparity could produce distortions when camera geometry differs from natural stereoscopic geometry. When the viewing distance and zero screen parallax setting are held constant and interaxial separation is varied, there is an asymmetric distortion in the mapping of stereoscopic to real space. If an object traverses this space at constant velocity, one might anticipate distortion of the perceived velocity. To determine if the predicted distortions are in fact perceived, we assessed perceived acceleration and deceleration using an animation of a ball moving in depth through a simulated environment, viewed stereoscopically. The method of limits was used to measure transition points between perceived acceleration and deceleration as a function of interaxial and context (textured vs. non-textured background). Based on binocular geometry, we predicted that the transition points would shift toward deceleration for small and towards acceleration for large interaxial separations. However, the average transition values were not influenced by interaxial separation. These data suggest that observers are able to discount distortions of stereoscopic space in interpreting the object motion. These results have important implications for the rendering or capture of effective stereoscopic 3D content.

show abstract

Section: Motion In Depth Cues In the Visual Systemmentioning

confidence: 97%

Motion in depth constancy in stereoscopic displays

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, geometry determines the amount of on-screen disparity from the scene layout and camera rig configuration [Benzeroual et al 2011a;Spottiswoode and Spottiswoode 1953;Woods et al 1993]. However, perceived depth in complex 3D scenes often differs from these geometric predictions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…However, S3D content is influenced by additional parameters that may cause further image distortion [Banks et al 2009;Benzeroual et al 2011a;Du et al 2013;Wartell et al 1999;Woods et al 1993]. Some of these are associated with the camera arrangement (e.g., separation, orientation), and still others are related to the viewing context (e.g., viewing distance, screen size).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual Tolerance to Stereoscopic 3D Image Distortion

Allison

Wilcox

2015

ACM Trans. Appl. Percept.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An intriguing aspect of picture perception is the viewer's tolerance to variation in viewing position, perspective, and display size. These factors are also present in stereoscopic media, where there are additional parameters associated with the camera arrangement (e.g., separation, orientation). The predicted amount of depth from disparity can be obtained trigonometrically; however, perceived depth in complex scenes often differs from geometric predictions based on binocular disparity alone. To evaluate the extent and the cause of deviations from geometric predictions of depth from disparity in naturalistic scenes, we recorded stereoscopic footage of an indoor scene with a range of camera separations (camera interaxial (IA) ranged from 3 to 95 mm) and displayed them on a range of screen sizes. In a series of experiments participants estimated 3D distances in the scene relative to a reference scene, compared depth between shots with different parameters, or reproduced the depth between pairs of objects in the scene using reaching or blind walking. The effects of IA and screen size were consistently and markedly smaller than predicted from the binocular viewing geometry, suggesting that observers are able to compensate for the predicted distortions. We conclude that the presence of multiple realistic monocular depth cues drives normalization of perceived depth from binocular disparity. It is not clear to what extent these differences are due to cognitive as opposed to perceptual factors. However, it is notable that these normalization processes are not task specific; they are evident in both perception-and actionoriented tasks.

show abstract