skip to main content
10.1145/2910017.2910623acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmsysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

SMART: a light field image quality dataset

Published:10 May 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this contribution, the design of a Light Field image dataset is presented. It can be useful for design, testing, and benchmarking Light Field image processing algorithms. As first step, image content selection criteria have been defined based on selected image quality key-attributes, i.e. spatial information, colorfulness, texture key features, depth of field, etc. Next, image scenes have been selected and captured by using the Lytro Illum Light Field camera. Performed analysis shows that the proposed set of images is sufficient for addressing a wide range of attributes relevant for assessing Light Field image quality.

References

  1. E. H. Adelson and J. Y. A. Wang. Single lens stereo with a plenoptic camera. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis & Machine Intelligence, (2), 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. F. Battisti, M. Carli, R. Olsson, P. Paudyal, and M. Sjostrom. SMART Light Field Image Dataset. http://www.comlab.uniroma3.it/SMART.html, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. T. E. Bishop, S. Zanetti, and P. Favaro. Light field superresolution. In Computational Photography (ICCP), 2009 IEEE International Conference on, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. C. Conti, L. D. Soares, and P. Nunes. Hevc-based 3d holoscopic video coding using self-similarity compensated prediction. Signal Processing: Image Communication, 42:59--78, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. D. G. Dansereau, O. Pizarro, and S. B. Williams. Linear volumetric focus for light field cameras. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 34(2):15, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. C. Faloutsos, R. Barber, M. Flickner, J. Hafner, W. Niblack, D. Petkovic, and W. Equitz. Efficient and effective querying by image content. Journal of intelligent information systems, 3, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. K. Fliegel and C. Timmerer. WG4 databases white paper v1. 5: QUALINET multimedia database enabling QoE evaluations and benchmarking. Prague/Klagenfurt, Czech Republic/Austria, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. L. Gabriel. Epreuves reversibles. photographies integrals. Comptes-Rendus Academie des Sciences, 146, 1908.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. A. Ghasemi, N. Afonso, and M. Vetterli. LCAV-31: a dataset for light field object recognition. In IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. R. M. Haralick, K. Shanmugam, and I. H. Dinstein. Textural features for image classification. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, (6), 1973.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. D. Hasler and S. E. Suesstrunk. Measuring colorfulness in natural images. In Electronic Imaging 2003, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. ITS. Spatial information (SI) filter. http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. P. ITU-T RECOMMENDATION. Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications. 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Y. Ke, X. Tang, and F. Jing. The design of high-level features for photo quality assessment. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. B. Keelan. Handbook of image quality: characterization and prediction. CRC Press, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. B. W. Keelan and H. Urabe. ISO 20462: a psychophysical image quality measurement standard. In Electronic Imaging, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. N. Li, J. Ye, Y. Ji, H. Ling, and J. Yu. Saliency detection on light field. In The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), June 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Y. Li, M. Sjostrom, R. Olsson, and U. Jennehag. Scalable coding of plenoptic images by using a sparse set and disparities. Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on, 25(1):80--91, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. I. Montilla, M. Puga, J. P. Luke, J. G. Marichal-Hernandez, and J. M. Rodriguez-Ramos. Design and laboratory results of a plenoptic objective: From 2D to 3D with a standard camera. Display Technology, Journal of, 11(1), 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. A. Mousnier and C. Vural, E. and Guillemot. Partial light field tomographic reconstruction from a fixed-camera focal stack. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.01903, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. R. Ng, M. Levoy, M. Brédif, G. Duval, M. Horowitz, and P. Hanrahan. Light field photography with a hand-held plenoptic camera. Computer Science Technical Report CSTR, 2(11), 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. P. Paudyal, F. Battisti, and M. Carli. A study on the effects of quality of service parameters on perceived video quality. In Visual Information Processing (EUVIP), 2014 5th European Workshop on, pages 1--6. IEEE, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. P. Paudyal, F. Battisti, and M. Carli. Impact of video content and transmission impairments on quality of experience. Multimedia Tools and Applications, pages 1--25, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Pedersen, N. Bonnier, J. Y. Hardeberg, and F. Albregtsen. Attributes of a new image quality model for color prints. In Color and Imaging Conference, volume 2009, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. C. M. Privitera and L. W. Stark. Algorithms for defining visual regions-of-interest: Comparison with eye fixations. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 22(9):970--982, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. R. Raghavendra, K. Raja, and C. Busch. Exploring the usefulness of light field camera for biometrics: An empirical study on face and iris recognition. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security (TIFS) (Accepted), 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. U. Rajashekar, L. K. Cormack, and A. C. Bovik. Image features that draw fixations. In Image Processing, 2003. ICIP 2003. Proceedings. 2003 International Conference on, volume 3, pages III--313. IEEE, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Raytrix. Raytrix light field camera. http://www.raytrix.de/, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. M. Rerabek, L. Yuan, L. A. Authier, and T. Ebrahimi. {ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG1 contribution} EPFL Light-Field Image Dataset. Technical report, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG1, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. V. Vaish and A. Adams. The (new) stanford light field archive. http:/lightfield.stanford.edu, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. S. Wanner, S. Meister, and B. Goldluecke. Datasets and benchmarks for densely sampled 4D light fields. In Annual Workshop on Vision, Modeling and Visualization: VMV, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. G. Wetzstein. Synthetic light field archive. http://web.media.mit.edu/gordonw/SyntheticLightFields/, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. S. Winkler. Analysis of public image and video databases for quality assessment. Selected Topics in Signal Processing, IEEE Journal of, 6(6), 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. SMART: a light field image quality dataset

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      MMSys '16: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Multimedia Systems
      May 2016
      420 pages
      ISBN:9781450342971
      DOI:10.1145/2910017
      • General Chair:
      • Christian Timmerer

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 10 May 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      MMSys '16 Paper Acceptance Rate20of71submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate176of530submissions,33%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader