skip to main content
10.1145/2382636.2382666acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswebmediaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Influence of self-similarity on 3D holoscopic video coding performance

Published:15 October 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Holoscopic imaging, also known as integral imaging, is a promising solution for glasses-free 3D technology since it allows a more natural and immersive 3D sensation with continuous full motion parallax. However, in order to provide 3D holoscopic content with convenient visual quality in terms of resolution and 3D perception, ultra-high resolution acquisition and display devices are required. Consequently, efficient video coding tools become essential to deal with this large amount of data. However, current and emerging state-of-the-art video coding technologies do not yet address the specific characteristics of 3D holoscopic content. In this context, this paper presents and studies a coding scheme based on the concept of self-similarity compensated prediction, which is used to explore the particular arrangement of 3D holoscopic content through the introduction of new prediction modes. In order to profoundly analyze these new prediction modes, two different generations of video codecs, modified to handle 3D holoscopic content, are examined and compared: the first one is derived from the H.264/AVC video coding standard while the second one is based on the recent standardization project called High Efficient Video Coding (HEVC). Experimental results clearly show the advantages of using this coding scheme in both codecs, as well as the connection between the performance of the self-similarity compensation process and the characteristics of the 3D holoscopic content.

References

  1. Aggoun, A. A 3D DCT Compression Algorithm For Omnidirectional Integral Images. In IEEE International Conference on Accoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP 2006) (Toulouse, France May 2006), 517--520.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Aggoun, A. Compression of 3D Integral Images Using 3D Wavelet Transform. Display Technology, Journal of, 7, 11 (Nov. 2011), 586--592.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Au, O. C., Zhang, X., Pang, C., and Wen, X. Suggested Common test conditions and software reference configurations for Screen Content Coding. JCTVC-F696 , Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC), Torino, July, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Bjontegaard, G. Calculation of average PSNR differences between RD curves. ITU-T Video Coding Experts Group (VCEG) Meeting, Austin, TX, USA, April, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Conti, C., Lino, J., Nunes, P., Soares, L. D., and Correia, P.L. Spatial Prediction Based on Self-Similarity for 3D Holoscopic Image and Video Coding. In 18th International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP 2011) (Brussels, Belgium 2011), 977--980.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Lippmann, G. Epreuves Reversibles Donnant la Sensation du Relief. Journal de Physique Théorique et Appliquée, 7, 1 (November 1908), 821--825.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Markets and Markets. Three-Dimensional (3D) Technology Market (2011 -- 2016) By Products, Applications & Technology Focus, Global Forecast & Analysis -- Features Introduction To 4D Technology. Markets and Markets, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. McCann, K., Bross, B., Sekiguchi, S., and Han, W. HM4: High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Test Model 4 Encoder Description. JCTVC-F802, Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC), Torino, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Shi, S., Gioia, P., and Madec, G. Efficient Compression Method for Integral Images Using Multi-View Video Coding. In 18th International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP 2011) (Brussels, Belgium September 2011), 141--144.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Ugur, K., Andersson, K., Fuldseth, A. et al. High Performance, Low Complexity Video Coding and the Emerging HEVC Standard. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 20, 12 (December 2010), 1688--1697. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Vetro, A., Wiegand, T., and Sullivan, G.J. Overview of the Stereo and Multiview Video Coding Extensions of the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC Standard. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99, 4 (April 2011), 626--642.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Wiegand, T., Sullivan, G. J., Bjøntegaard, G., and Luthra, A. Overview of the H.264/AVC Video Coding Standard. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 13, 7 (July 2003), 560--576. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Influence of self-similarity on 3D holoscopic video coding performance

      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 Other conferences
        WebMedia '12: Proceedings of the 18th Brazilian symposium on Multimedia and the web
        October 2012
        426 pages
        ISBN:9781450317061
        DOI:10.1145/2382636

        Copyright © 2012 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: 15 October 2012

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate270of873submissions,31%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader