2017 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia &Amp; Expo Workshops (ICMEW) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/icmew.2017.8026223
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

To interpolate or not to interpolate: Subjective assessment of interpolation performance on a light field display

Abstract: Interpolating virtual views from sparse visual content increases the angular resolution of the visualization. However, such techniques may degrade the image quality through inaccurate view estimation. The smooth motion parallax through increased angular resolution, and image quality are essential components of the overall user experience. The choice of interpolation initiates an unclear trade-off between them. In this paper, we introduce our research on interpolation techniques for 3D light field visualization… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
30
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

7
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For visual stimuli, we used the 972-faced polyhedron and the structure of 120 regular dodecahedra 5 . In this paper, we refer to them as stimulus A and B, respectively.…”
Section: Experimental Setup and Obtained Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For visual stimuli, we used the 972-faced polyhedron and the structure of 120 regular dodecahedra 5 . In this paper, we refer to them as stimulus A and B, respectively.…”
Section: Experimental Setup and Obtained Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper, we refer to them as stimulus A and B, respectively. In numerous past researches [5] [6] [7], we have already involved these complex mathematical bodies in our tests, due to their sensitivity towards degradations. While the spatial resolution was constant (1440 × 1080), we created the stimuli with different extents of angular resolution.…”
Section: Experimental Setup and Obtained Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For stimuli A, B and D, variation in Q 3D scores was very small, whereas for stimulus C, Q 3D scores varied significantly. This can be attributed to the fact that stimulus C has large depth variations compared to other three stimuli [19]. Also, the absence of explicit angular distortions may have resulted in low variations in Q 3D , as the angular quality score has higher weight during the pooling operation.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect of view interpolation is also addressed in the work of Cserkaszky et al [39], visualizing content on the C80 cinema system. The difference is that while Tamboli et al investigated how the ratio of genuine to synthesized views affects the user experience (the more the views synthesized, the higher the degradation in QoE), Cserkaszky et al targeted a potential benefits of synthesis and compared the performance of interpolation methods.…”
Section: Perceived Quality Of Light Field Visualizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This means that the views that were not transmitted by the server would be interpolated real-time at the client's side, restoring the original angular resolution. Although the extent of interpolation has to be kept within reasonable boundaries in order to prevent major visual degradations, the restoration of angular resolution can significantly contribute to the user experience [39].…”
Section: Perceived Quality Of Light Field Visualizationmentioning
confidence: 99%