Subjective Comparison of Consumer Television Technologies for 3D Visualization

Abstract

Abstract-This paper presents a comparison among different consumer 3D display technologies by means of a subjective assessment test. Therefore, four 55-in displays have been considered: one autostereoscopic display, one stereoscopic with polarized passive glasses, and two with active shutter glasses. In addition, a high-quality 3D video database has been used to show diverse material with both views in high definition. To carry out the test, standard recommendations have been followed considering also some modifications looking for a test environment more similar to real home viewing conditions, with the objective of obtaining more representative conclusions. Moreover, several perceptual factors have been considered to study the performance of the displays, such as picture quality, depth perception, and visual discomfort. The obtained results show interesting issues, like the performance improvement of active shutter glasses technology, the high performance of the polarized glasses technology in terms of quality and comfort, and the need of improvement of the autostereoscopic displays to complement the visual comfort to reach a global high-quality visual experience.Index Terms-Depth perception, quality of experience, subjective evaluation, 3D displays, visual discomfort.

MultiView Perceptual Disparity Model for Super MultiView Video

“…However, stereoscopic systems have not achieved total acceptance of consumers, due to reasons including: the lack of high quality 3D video content, the need of wearing specific glasses, and the absence of motion parallax cues entailing a deficient immersive experience. Although the next generation of multiview auto-stereoscopic displays solves the glasses-free and motion parallax issues up to a certain extent, it can be argued that auto-stereoscopic display technology does not provide a satisfactory Quality of Experience (QoE) for its price [1]. In particular, in addition to the loss of resolution needed to provide multiple views, other critical factors affect the user experience and thus limit the acceptance of auto-stereoscopic monitors.…”

Subjective Assessment of Super Multiview Video with Coding Artifacts

“…Stereoscopic displays were developed as the first generation of 3D displays, but they present some disadvantages such as the lack of motion parallax (key to immersion engagement) and the need of wearing specific glasses. These displays evolved toward autostereoscopic displays that, despite being a glassesfree technology and solving the lack of motion parallax, present other drawbacks as low view density or the accommodationvergence conflict [2], negatively affecting the visualization experience [3].…”

Analysis of quality of experience in 3D video systems

“…Also, the validation of the CIETI methodology was published in QoMEX 2012 [61]. Moreover, the study comparing consumer display technologies for 3D video was published in the Journal of Display Technology [56], while the work concerning SMV was published in QoMEX 2012 [15]. Finally, apart from the aforementioned contributions, the work carried out during the elaboration of this thesis in relation to the development of objective quality metrics resulted in publications in various conferences [30,37,59,62,140], and also in a contribution to the book IPTV Multiservice QoE Management System [31].…”