Advertisement

Influence of Task and Scene Content on Subjective Video Quality

  • Ying Zhong
  • Iain Richardson
  • Arash Sahraie
  • Peter McGeorge
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3211)

Abstract

The influences of task and scene content on a viewer’s subjective opinion of compressed video quality are investigated. A group of test subjects are presented with a number of compressed video clips, with or without an initial “task” instruction. Subjective quality ratings and selected eye movement tracking results are recorded. The results indicate that subjective quality is strongly influenced by the presence or absence of distortion in foreground human figures in a video scene and is also influenced by the presence or absence of an initial task. The implications of these results for subjective quality testing and for the design of video compression systems are discussed.

Keywords

Video Clip Visual Quality Subjective Quality Quantization Parameter Video Compression 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ISO/IEC 14496-2: Coding of Audio-Visual Objects: Part 2 (MPEG-2 Visual) (July 2000) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO/IEC 14496-10 / ITU-T Rec. H.264, :Advanced Video Coding for Generic Audiovisual Service (May 2003) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Richardson, I.: Video Codec Design. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gazzaniga, M., Ivery, R., Mangun, G.: Cognitive neuroscience, the biology of the mind, 2nd edn. Norton, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Findlay, J.M., Gilchrist, I.: Active Vision: the Psychology of Looking and Seeing. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wiegand, T., Schwarz, H., Joch, A., Kossentini, F., Sullivan, G.: Rate-constrained coder control and comparison of video coding standards. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 13(7) (July 2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhong, Y., Richardson, I., Sahraie, A., McGeorge, P.: Qualitative and quantitative assessment in video compression. In: The 12th European Conference on Eye Movements, Dundee, Scotland (August 2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Richardson, I.: H.264 and MPEG-4 Video Compression. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Recommendation BT.500-10: Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures, ITU-R (2000) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Recommendation P.910: Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. ITU-T (1999) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Muir, L., Richardson, I., Leaper, S.: Gaze tracking and its application to video coding for sign language. In: Picture Coding Symposium 2003, Saint Malo – France (April 2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schaar, M., Lin, Y.: Content-based selective enhancement for streaming video. In: Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP) (October 2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ying Zhong
    • 1
  • Iain Richardson
    • 1
  • Arash Sahraie
    • 2
  • Peter McGeorge
    • 2
  1. 1.Image Communication Technology GroupThe Robert Gordon UniversityUK
  2. 2.Vision Research LabUniversity of AberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations