journal article·2019-04-03Open access

The key performance indicators of projection-based light field visualization

Peter A. Kara, Roopak R. Tamboli, Oleksii Doronin, Aron Cserkaszky, Attila Barsi, Zsolt Nagy, Maria G. Martini, Aniko Simon

Journal of Information Display· Volume 20· Issue 2

Abstract

At the time of writing this paper, light field visualization has entered the professional environments in the industry and has also become commercially available. It is not yet present on the consumer market, however, and its widespread emergence is expected in the following decade, with affordable end user devices and a vast variety of applications and contents. The successful integration of this technology into people’s everyday lives essentially depends on the visualization quality, which is achieved through excellence in terms of the key performance indicators of the display system and the content it visualizes. In this paper, the key performance indicators of light field visualization for both display and content are reviewed. Beyond providing a comprehensive review of the vital parameters of visualization quality, this paper discusses the ongoing and future relevant research efforts, demonstrates the practical uses of the technology, highlights certain dependencies between the indicators, and addresses issues of perceived quality with regard to the lack of compliance with the requirements and visual thresholds.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Visual perception and processing mechanisms · Advanced Optical Imaging Technologies · Advanced Vision and Imaging

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Holografika, Budapest, Hungary

WMN Research Group, Kingston University, London, UK

Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Sangareddy, Kandi, India

Sigma Technology, Budapest, Hungary

Funding

EU H2020 ETN-FPI · EU H2020 QoE-Net

References (39)

Show source-provided references
1. Lippmann G. · Comptes-Rendus Academie des Sciences · 1908 · 146 · 446
2. Alioscopy 3D UHD 84 ″ LV Display, (retrieved Jan. 2019).
3. 10.1145/2508363.250836610.1145/2508363.2508366 ↗
4. A.J. Hansen, M. Kraus, and J. Klein, Light Field Rendering for Head Mounted Displays Using Pixel Reprojection, International Conference on Computer Graphics Theory and Applications, 2017.
5. 10.3390/s15040864210.3390/s150408642 ↗
6. T. Balogh, Z. Nagy, P.T. Kovács, and V.K. Adhikarla, Natural 3D Content on Glasses-free Light-field 3D Cinema, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging, International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2013.10.1117/12.2002493 ↗
7. P.A. Kara, Z. Nagy, M.G. Martini, and A. Barsi, Cinema as Large as Life: Large-scale Light Field Cinema System, 2017 International Conference on 3D Immersion (IC3D), IEEE, 2017.10.1109/IC3D.2017.8251893 ↗
8. 10.1364/OE.21.02682010.1364/OE.21.026820 ↗
9. Inoue N. · New Breeze · 2014 · 26 · 10
10. 10.1117/1.OE.57.6.06161010.1117/1.OE.57.6.061610 ↗
11. Holovizio 722RC Light Field Display, (retrieved Jan. 2019).
12. Holovizio 80WLT Light Field Display, (retrieved Jan. 2019).
13. 10.1109/JSTSP.2017.273860610.1109/JSTSP.2017.2738606 ↗
14. P.T. Kovács, K. Lackner, A. Barsi, A. Balázs, A. Boev, R. Bregovic, and A. Gotchev, Measurement of Perceived Spatial Resolution in 3D Light-field Displays, International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), IEEE, 768–772, 2014.10.1109/ICIP.2014.7025154 ↗
15. P.T. Kovács, A. Boev, R. Bregovic, and A. Gotchev, Quality Measurements of 3D Light-field Displays, Eighth International Workshop on Video Processing and Quality Metrics for Consumer Electronics (VPQM), 2014.
16. 10.1364/AO.57.00181710.1364/AO.57.001817 ↗
17. P.A. Kara, P.T. Kovács, M.G. Martini, A. Barsi, K. Lackner, and T. Balogh, Viva la Resolution: The Perceivable Differences between Image Resolutions for Light Field Displays, in 5th ISCA/DEGA Workshop on Perceptual Quality of Systems (PQS), 2016.10.21437/PQS.2016-23 ↗
18. P.A. Kara, M.G. Martini, P.T. Kovács, S. Imre, A. Barsi, K. Lackner, and T. Balogh, Perceived Quality of Angular Resolution for Light Field Displays and the Validity of Subjective Assessment, International Conference on 3D Imaging (IC3D), 2016.10.1109/IC3D.2016.7823450 ↗
19. P.A. Kara, A. Cserkaszky, A. Barsi, T. Papp, M.G. Martini, and L. Bokor, The Interdependence of Spatial and Angular Resolution in the Quality of Experience of Light Field Visualization, in 2017 International Conference on 3D Immersion (IC3D), IEEE, 2017.10.1109/IC3D.2017.8251902 ↗
20. P.A. Kara, R.R. Tamboli, A. Cserkaszky, M.G. Martini, A. Barsi, and L. Bokor, The Perceived Quality of Light-field Video Services, SPIE Applications of Digital Image Processing XLI, 2018.10.1117/12.2320562 ↗
21. R.R. Tamboli, M.S. Reddy, P.A. Kara, M.G. Martini, S.S. Channappayya, and S. Jana, A High-angular-resolution Turntable Data-set for Experiments on Light Field Visualization Quality, 10th International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), 2018.10.1109/QoMEX.2018.8463402 ↗
22. C. Conti, L.D. Soares, P. Nunes, C. Perra, P.A. Assuncao, M. Sjöström, Y. Li, R. Olsson, and U. Jennehag, Light Field Image Compression, 3D Visual Content Creation, Coding and Delivery, Springer, 143–176, 2019.10.1007/978-3-319-77842-6_6 ↗
23. R.R. Tamboli, A. Cserkaszky, P.A. Kara, A. Barsi, and M.G. Martini, Objective Quality Evaluation of an Angularly-continuous Light-field Format, International Conference on 3D Immersion (IC3D), 2018.10.1109/IC3D.2018.8657876 ↗
24. 10.1109/JSTSP.2017.274016710.1109/JSTSP.2017.2740167 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.image.2015.04.01210.1016/j.image.2015.04.012 ↗
26. Ahmad W. · Opt. Photonics Digit. Technol. Imaging Appl. V · 2018 · 1
27. B. Guo, J. Wen, and Y. Han, Two-pass Light Field Image Compression for Spatial Quality and Angular Consistency, Cornell University’s Computing Research Repository (CoRR), 2018.
28. X. Zhang, P.A. Chou, M. Sun, M. Tang, S. Wang, S. Ma, and W. Gao, Surface Light Field Compression Using a Point Cloud Codec, IEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems (JETCAS), 2018.10.1109/JETCAS.2018.2883479 ↗
29. O. Doronin, A. Barsi, P.A. Kara, and M.G. Martini, Ray Tracing for Holovizio Light Field Displays, 2017 International Conference on 3D Immersion (IC3D), IEEE, 2017.10.1109/IC3D.2017.8251894 ↗
30. T.E. Bishop, S. Zanetti, and P. Favaro, Light Field Superresolution, Computational Photography (ICCP), 2009 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2009, 1–9.10.1109/ICCPHOT.2009.5559010 ↗
31. Y. Takaki, Super Multi-view Display with 128 Viewpoints and Viewpoint Formation, Stereoscopic Displays and Applications XX, 7237, International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2009.10.1117/12.807119 ↗
32. A. Cserkaszky, A. Barsi, Z. Nagy, G. Puhr, T. Balogh, and P.A. Kara, Real-time Light-field 3D Telepresence, 7th European Workshop on Visual Information Processing (EUVIP), 2018.10.1109/EUVIP.2018.8611663 ↗
33. 10.1111/cgf.1314810.1111/cgf.13148 ↗
34. H. Najaf-Zadeh, M. Budagavi, and E. Faramarzi, VR+HDR: A System for Viewdependent Rendering of HDR Video in Virtual Reality, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), IEEE, 1032–1036, 2017.10.1109/ICIP.2017.8296438 ↗
35. M. Melo, H. Coelho, K. Bouatouch, M. Bessa, R. Cozot, and A. Chalmers, Tone Mapping HDR Panoramas for Viewing in Head Mounted Displays, 13th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications (VISIGRAPP 2018), 1, 232–239, 2018.10.5220/0006615402320239 ↗
36. 10.1145/2185520.218558910.1145/2185520.2185589 ↗
37. 10.1364/OE.25.02089410.1364/OE.25.020894 ↗
38. 10.1145/566654.56657510.1145/566654.566575 ↗
39. O. Doronin and A. Barsi, Estimation of Global Luminance for HoloVizio 3D Display, International Conference on 3D Immersion (IC3D), 2018.10.1109/IC3D.2018.8657834 ↗