DOCSLIB.ORG

Avoiding Monocular Artifacts in Clinical Stereotests Presented on Column

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Avoiding Monocular Artifacts in Clinical Stereotests Presented on Column Journal of Vision (2016) 16(14):13, 1–14 1 Avoiding monocular artifacts in clinical stereotests presented on column-interleaved digital stereoscopic displays Faculty of Psychology, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, # Ignacio Serrano-Pedraza Newcastle upon Tyne, UK $ Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Kathleen Vancleef Newcastle upon Tyne, UK $ Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, # Jenny C. A. Read Newcastle upon Tyne, UK $ New forms of stereoscopic 3-D technology offer vision scientists new opportunities for research, but also Introduction come with distinct problems. Here we consider autostereo displays where the two eyes’ images are Technical advances are offering vision scientists new spatially interleaved in alternating columns of pixels ways of displaying stereo images. One example is the and no glasses or special optics are required. Column- development of autostereoscopic 3-D displays, which interleaved displays produce an excellent stereoscopic do not require the use of eyeglasses or mirrors to view effect, but subtle changes in the angle of view can them. The two most common multiplexing techniques increase cross talk or even interchange the left and used in autostereo displays are the parallax barrier right eyes’ images. This creates several challenges to (using opaque layers) and the microlens technique the presentation of cyclopean stereograms (containing (using cylindrical lenslets; Dodgson, 2005; Holliman, structure which is only detectable by binocular vision). Dodgson, Favalora, & Pockett, 2011; Konrad & Halle, We discuss the potential artifacts, including one that is 2007; Peterka et al., 2008; Sexton & Surman, 1999). In unique to column-interleaved displays, whereby scene this work we will focus on the parallax-barrier elements such as dots in a random-dot stereogram technique, which produces a column-interleaved stereo appear wider or narrower depending on the sign of display. The parallax barrier is in fact one of the oldest their disparity. We derive an algorithm for creating autostereoscopic techniques (Sexton & Surman, 1999): stimuliwhicharefreefromthisartifact.Weshowthat In 1838, Wheatstone proposed a simple version of this this and other artifacts can be avoided by (a) using a task which is robust to disparity-sign inversion—for technique (see his figure 6) in order to help fuse two example, a disparity-detection rather than disparate images when the naked eyes are used. discrimination task—(b) using our proposed algorithm As generally implemented today, digital parallax- to ensure that parallax is applied symmetrically on the barrier stereoscopic displays consist of two LCD panels column-interleaved display, and (c) using a dynamic overlaid on one another with a precise geometric stimulus to avoid monocular artifacts from motion relationship (Konrad & Halle, 2007). The back panel is parallax. In order to test our recommendations, we used as normal to display the images, and the front is performed two experiments using a stereoacuity task transparent when the device is used in 2-D mode. When implemented with a parallax-barrier tablet. Our the 3-D display is activated, the front LCD panel results confirm that these recommendations eliminate generates opaque vertical grid lines (Figure 1). When the artifacts. We believe that these recommendations the viewer is in the right position, odd columns of pixels will be useful to vision scientists interested in running are visible only to one eye, while even columns are stereo psychophysics experiments using parallax- visible only to the other. Thus this technique allows two barrier and other column-interleaved digital displays. disparate images to be presented in column-interleaved Citation: Serrano-Pedraza, I., Vancleef, K., & Read, J. C. A. (2016). Avoiding monocular artifacts in clinical stereotests presented on column-interleaved digital stereoscopic displays. Journal of Vision, 16(14):13, 1–14, doi:10.1167/16.14.13. doi: 10.1167/16.14.13 Received August 10, 2016; published November 16, 2016 ISSN 1534-7362 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Downloaded From: http://jov.arvojournals.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/Journals/JOV/935848/ on 11/18/2016 Journal of Vision (2016) 16(14):13, 1–14 Serrano-Pedraza, Vancleef, & Read 2 Figure 1. Basic idea behind the parallax-barrier technology. (a) A perspective example. (b) A top view. format on a single screen, one image to each eye, so it is available on handheld mobile devices, making it they can be fused without using 3-D glasses. portable and convenient. One limitation of these parallax-barrier displays is The fundamental requirement of a stereoacuity test is that the spatial resolution of the image in the horizontal that it must not have monocular cues (e.g., occlusion, dimension is halved. A further limitation is that the texture gradient, relative size, motion parallax) that occlusion geometry only holds over a limited range of enable observers to perform correctly without using their viewing distances and only if the display is frontopar- stereovision. Many current clinical stereotests, such as allel, so that the interocular axis is parallel to the screen the Randot (Figure 2), Frisby (Figure 3), TNO, Lang, plane. If the display is rotated even slightly away from and Random-Dot E tests, try to avoid the presence of frontoparallel (e.g., viewed from the side), both images monocular depth cues by using random-element stereo- will become visible to both eyes. This can also occur if grams (Julesz, 1960). The subject has to detect a target the observer views the display from the wrong distance, which—ideally—is perfectly camouflaged in the monoc- or with more extreme rotations about the interocular ular images and can be detected only by stereopsis (in axis (e.g., if the display is viewed from above or below; Julesz’s terminology, the target is cyclopean). In all of see Figure 11A). With more extreme rotations away these tests, monocular artifacts are a potential issue if from frontoparallel (more oblique viewing, e.g., if the care is not taken in the administration of the test. display is viewed from the left or right side), the images Most current stereotests use 3-D glasses, either can become inverted so that the image intended for the polarized (Randot, Random-Dot E) or anaglyph right eye will be visible only to the left, and vice versa. (TNO), to separate the images presented to each eye. In this article, we consider the use of column- The use of 3-D glasses often allows significant cross interleaved autostereo digital technology for clinical talk between the two eyes—that is, some fraction of the tests of stereoacuity, or stereotests. This technology has image that is presented to one eye also passes through three main advantages that make it particularly the filter that covers the other eye. Cross talk is attractive for clinical applications: (a) It does not undesirable because it reduces stereoacuity and depth require special glasses or other optics, which is perception (Cormack, Stevenson, & Landers, 1997; especially useful with children; (b) it offers very low Schor & Heckmann, 1989). Potentially, cross talk can interocular cross talk when correctly positioned; and (c) also ‘‘de-camouflage’’ a cyclopean object, enabling a Figure 2. Possible cross-talk artifacts in the Randot stereotest. (A) Random-dot component, in which the task is to recognize the disparate symbol (the letter E). (B) Animals component, in which the task is to identify the nearest animal (the cat, fourth from the left). If the viewer removes his or her 3-D glasses or tilts his or her head 458, so that both eyes view the merged binocular image instead of each eye seeing its intended image, the correct answer is visible monocularly in both cases. Downloaded From: http://jov.arvojournals.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/Journals/JOV/935848/ on 11/18/2016 Journal of Vision (2016) 16(14):13, 1–14 Serrano-Pedraza, Vancleef, & Read 3 Figure 3. (A) Frisby stereotest. (B) Schematic idea of a disparity-detection test. Four textured patches are presented, all at the same background parallax except one, which contains a target at a different parallax. The task is to identify the patch containing the target. stereoblind user to detect a target which was intended element cyclopean content generated for a non-column- to be visible only to stereopsis. For example, in the interleaved display is displayed in column-interleaved Randot stereotest, subjects are asked to identify format, the elements appear wider or narrower on the cyclopean shapes in a random-dot pattern. When the screen depending on the sign of their disparity (near or test is viewed without glasses, the disparate dots appear far relative to the screen). When combined with cross- twice, meaning that the shapes are clearly visible talk artifacts, this could also allow observers to detect monocularly (Figure 2A). The same problem also the stimulus using monocular cues. We will show applies even with glasses if the subject tilts his or her examples of this artifact and a procedure to get rid of it. head. The Randot stereotest uses linear polarization to However, the critical advantage of digital displays separate left and right images, so a head tilt of 458 over the paper and plastic used for current clinical results in 100% cross talk. stereotests is that it is possible to design a stereotest to The Lang and Frisby stereotests both avoid the need be robust to all these artifacts. We will explain how to for 3-D glasses. The Lang stereotest uses column- achieve this, and will show data indicating that after interleaved autostereo lenticular technology, in which our strategies are applied, viewers cannot achieve lenses are used to direct each image to the appropriate artificially good results through the use of monocular eye. If the subject is allowed to tilt the test card back and cues. With these strategies, digital column-interleaved forth, he or she can identify the disparate shape from the 3-D displays are far more robust to monocular-cue monocular motion (i.e., motion parallax) as the left and artifacts than are current clinical stereotests.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stereo 3D (Depth) from 2D
    Stereo 3D (Depth) from 2D • 3D information is lost by Viewing Stereo projection. Stereograms • How do we recover 3D Autostereograms information? Depth from Stereo Image 3D Model Depth Cues Shadows: Occlusions: Shading: Size Constancy Perspective Illusions (perspective): Height in Plane: Texture Gradient: 3D from 2D + Accommodation • Accommodation (Focus) • Change in lens curvature • Eye Vengeance according to object depth. • Effective depth: 20-300 cm. • Motion. • Stereo Accommodation Eye Vergence • Change in lens curvature • Change in lens curvature according to object depth. according to object depth. • Effective depth: 20-300 cm. • Effective depth: up to 6 m. Motion: Motion: Stereo Vision • In a system with 2 cameras (eyes), 2 different images are captured. • The "disparity" between the images is larger for closer objects: 1 disp ∝ depth • "Fusion" of these 2 images gives disparities depth information. Left Right Right Eye Left Eye Right Eye Left Eye Image Separation for Stereo • Special Glasses • Red/green images with red/green glasses. • Orthogonal Polarization • Alternating Shuttering Optic System Optic System Parlor Stereo Viewer 1850 Viewmaster 1939 ViduTech 2011 Active Shutter System Red/Green Filters Anaglyphs Anaglyphs How they Work Orthogonal Polarization Orthogonal Polarization Linear Polarizers: 2 polarized projectors are used (or alternating polarization) Orthogonal Polarization Orthogonal Polarization Circular Polarizers: Circular Polarizers: Left handed Right handed Orthogonal Polarization TV and Computer Screens Polarized Glasses Circular Polarizer Glasses: Same as polarizers – but reverse light direction Left handed Right handed Glasses Free TV and Glasses Free TV and Computer Screens Computer Screens Parallax Stereogram Parallax Stereogram Parallax Barrier display Uses Vertical Slits Blocks part of screen from each eye Glasses Free TV and Glasses Free TV and Computer Screens Computer Screens Lenticular lens method Lenticular lens method Uses lens arrays to send different Image to each eye.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education
    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2018 A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education Matthew Hackett University of Central Florida Part of the Anatomy Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Doctoral Dissertation (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Hackett, Matthew, "A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education" (2018). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 6408. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/6408 A REVIEW AND SELECTIVE ANALYSIS OF 3D DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES FOR ANATOMICAL EDUCATION by: MATTHEW G. HACKETT BSE University of Central Florida 2007, MSE University of Florida 2009, MS University of Central Florida 2012 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Modeling and Simulation program in the College of Engineering and Computer Science at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2018 Major Professor: Michael Proctor ©2018 Matthew Hackett ii ABSTRACT The study of anatomy is complex and difficult for students in both graduate and undergraduate education. Researchers have attempted to improve anatomical education with the inclusion of three-dimensional visualization, with the prevailing finding that 3D is beneficial to students. However, there is limited research on the relative efficacy of different 3D modalities, including monoscopic, stereoscopic, and autostereoscopic displays.
    [Show full text]
  • State-Of-The-Art in Holography and Auto-Stereoscopic Displays
    State-of-the-art in holography and auto-stereoscopic displays Daniel Jönsson <Ersätt med egen bild> 2019-05-13 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Auto-stereoscopic displays ........................................................................................................................... 5 Two-View Autostereoscopic Displays ....................................................................................................... 5 Multi-view Autostereoscopic Displays ...................................................................................................... 7 Light Field Displays .................................................................................................................................. 10 Market ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 Display panels ......................................................................................................................................... 14 AR ............................................................................................................................................................ 14 Application Fields ........................................................................................................................................ 15 Companies .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Distributed Rendering for Multiview Parallax Displays
    Distributed Rendering for Multiview Parallax Displays Annen T.a, Matusik W.b, P¯ster H.b, Seidel H-P.a, Zwicker M.c aMPI, SaarbrucÄ ken, Germany bMERL, Cambridge, MA, USA cMIT, Cambridge, MA, USA ABSTRACT 3D display technology holds great promise for the future of television, virtual reality, entertainment, and visual- ization. Multiview parallax displays deliver stereoscopic views without glasses to arbitrary positions within the viewing zone. These systems must include a high-performance and scalable 3D rendering subsystem in order to generate multiple views at real-time frame rates. This paper describes a distributed rendering system for large-scale multiview parallax displays built with a network of PCs, commodity graphics accelerators, multiple projectors, and multiview screens. The main challenge is to render various perspective views of the scene and assign rendering tasks e®ectively. In this paper we investigate two di®erent approaches: Optical multiplexing for lenticular screens and software multiplexing for parallax-barrier displays. We describe the construction of large- scale multi-projector 3D display systems using lenticular and parallax-barrier technology. We have developed di®erent distributed rendering algorithms using the Chromium stream-processing framework and evaluate the trade-o®s and performance bottlenecks. Our results show that Chromium is well suited for interactive rendering on multiview parallax displays. Keywords: Multiview Parallax Displays, Distributed Rendering, Software/Optical Multiplexing, Automatic Calibration 1. INTRODUCTION For more than a century, the display of true three-dimensional images has inspired the imagination and ingenu- ity of engineers and inventors. Ideally, such 3D displays provide stereopsis (i.e., binocular perception of depth), kineopsis (i.e., depth perception from motion parallax), and accommodation (i.e., depth perception through fo- cusing).
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Stereoscopic 3D Glasses for Gaming
    ISSN: 2278 – 1323 International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering & Technology (IJARCET) Volume 5, Issue 6, June 2016 Review of Stereoscopic 3D Glasses for Gaming Yogesh Bhimsen Joshi, Avinash Gautam Waywal sound cards and CD-ROMs had the multimedia Abstract— Only a decade ago, watching in 3-D capability. meant seeing through a pair of red and blue glasses. Early 3D games such as Alpha Waves, Starglider 2 It was really great at first sight, but 3-D technology began with flat-shaded graphics and then has been moving on. Scientists have been aware of progressed with simple forms of texture mapping how human vision works and current generation of such as in Wolfenstein 3D. computers are more powerful than ever before. In the early 1990s, the most popular method of Therefore, most of the computer users are familiar with 3-D games. Back in the '90s, most of the publishing games for smaller developers was enthusiasts were amazed by the game Castle shareware distribution, including then-fledgling Wolfenstein 3D, which took place in a maze-like companies such as Apogee which is now branded as castle, which was existed in three dimensions. 3D Realms, Epic MegaGames (now known as Epic Nowadays, gamers can enjoy even more complicated Games), and id Software. It enabled consumers the graphics with the available peripherals. This paper opportunity to try a trial portion of the game, which gives an overview of this 3-D Gaming technology and was restricted to complete first section or an episode various gaming peripherals. This paper will also of full version of the game, before purchasing it.
    [Show full text]
  • Dolby 3D for Glasses-Free TV and Devices — Preliminary Table of Contents
    WHITE PAPER — PRELIMINARY Dolby® 3D for Glasses-Free TV and Devices Overview Three-dimensional television (3D TV) offers tremendous market potential, but up to now, the annoyance of the required glasses has limited consumer viewing and slowed adoption. The real future of consumer 3D as an everyday experience that can truly tap into the market lies with glasses-free viewing. While the industry as a whole acknowledges this, glasses-free technology to date has had its own problems, generally suffering from restricted viewing positions and distracting visual artifacts. Dolby® 3D changes that. It is a collection of processing and coding techniques brought to market through a collaboration between Dolby and Philips. The companies recently presented the Dolby 3D suite of innovative technologies to the public, garnering industry awards and accolades. 3D content is consumed from a variety of sources such as packaged media, broadcasts, and over the top (OTT) streaming. It is viewed on a variety of devices, increasingly including display devices equipped with advanced optical lenses that enable glasses-free viewing. When the Dolby 3D suite of technologies is implemented in devices along the path that 3D content takes to glasses-free 3D displays, Dolby ensures that the viewer’s experience will surpass any previous 3D TV experience. The underlying architectures of these devices must accommodate the complexities of Dolby 3D processing specifications, which are key to ensuring that 3D perception consistently meets the expectations of sophisticated consumers. But what is this underlying technology? How is it feasible in architectures prevalent today? When will all the pieces of the ecosystem come together? This white paper answers these questions in depth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Varriertm Autostereoscopic Virtual Reality Display
    submission id papers_0427 The VarrierTM Autostereoscopic Virtual Reality Display Daniel J. Sandin, Todd Margolis, Jinghua Ge, Javier Girado, Tom Peterka, Thomas A. DeFanti Electronic Visualization Laboratory University of Illinois at Chicago [email protected] Abstract In most other lenticular and barrier strip implementations, stereo is achieved by sorting image slices in integer (image) coordinates. Virtual reality (VR) has long been hampered by the gear Moreover, many autostereo systems compress scene depth in the z needed to make the experience possible; specifically, stereo direction to improve image quality but Varrier is orthoscopic, glasses and tracking devices. Autostereoscopic display devices are which means that all 3 dimensions are displayed in the same gaining popularity by freeing the user from stereo glasses, scale. Besides head-tracked perspective interaction, the user can however few qualify as VR displays. The Electronic Visualization further interact with VR applications through hand-held devices Laboratory (EVL) at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) such as a 3d wand, for example to control navigation through has designed and produced a large scale, high resolution head- virtual worlds. tracked barrier-strip autostereoscopic display system that There are four main contributions of this paper. New virtual produces a VR immersive experience without requiring the user to barrier algorithms are presented that enhance image quality and wear any encumbrances. The resulting system, called Varrier, is a lower color shifts by operating at sub-pixel resolution. Automated passive parallax barrier 35-panel tiled display that produces a camera-based registration of the physical and virtual barrier strip wide field of view, head-tracked VR experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynallax: Dynamic Parallax Barrier Autostereoscopic Display
    Dynallax: Dynamic Parallax Barrier Autostereoscopic Display BY THOMAS PETERKA B.S., University of Illinois at Chicago, 1987 M.S., University of Illinois at Chicago, 2003 PH.D. DISSERTATION Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Chicago, 2007 Chicago, Illinois This thesis is dedicated to Melinda, Chris, and Amanda, who always believed in me, and whose confidence helped me believe in myself. Graduate school would never have been possible without their love and support, and for this I will always be grateful. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the following individuals for their assistance and support. • Andrew Johnson of the Electronic Visualization Laboratory (EVL), University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) for advising me during my Ph.D. studies, for serving on the dissertation committee and for providing valuable feedback and critical reviews of my writing • Dan Sandin of EVL, UIC for introducing me to autostereoscopy, for providing the opportunity to work with him in this exciting field, for serving on the dissertation committee, and for many years of dedication to the advancement of VR as both an art and a science • Jason Leigh, EVL, UIC for serving on the dissertation committee and providing guidance, support, insight, and funding for my work • Tom DeFanti, EVL, UIC, UCSD, for making time to serve on my committee, and for his ongoing support and friendship for many years at EVL • Jurgen Schulze, UCSD, for taking the time and effort to travel from San Diego to Chicago to serve on the committee and for his interest and willingness to participate TP iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Seefront Gmbh 2013 Seefront‘S Approach to Glasses-Free 3D
    No glasses please! A short introduction to SeeFront‘s glasses-free 3D technology. 1 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 SeeFront‘s approach to glasses-free 3D Let the display wear the 3D glasses! 2 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS A flat-panel display: LCD, OLED, … 3 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS … is equipped with a “3D filter” 4 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS … not functional, yet. 5 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS … not functional, yet… 6 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS … but now. 7 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Parallax barrier 8 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Parallax barrier 9 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Parallax barrier 10 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Parallax barrier, switched OFF… 11 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS … and switched ON again… 12 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Perceived resolution Good Number of users 1 Freedom of movement No Number of 3D views 1 Single-view 3D display without freedom of movement 13 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Multi-view display Another option 14 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy:
    [Show full text]
  • Principles and Evaluation of Autostereoscopic Photogrammetric Measurement
    04-084 3/14/06 9:02 PM Page 365 Principles and Evaluation of Autostereoscopic Photogrammetric Measurement Jie Shan, Chiung-Shiuan Fu, Bin Li, James Bethel, Jeffrey Kretsch, and Edward Mikhail Abstract display alternating pairs of remote sensing images. Usery Stereoscopic perception is a basic requirement for photogram- (2003) discusses the critical issues such as color, resolution, metric 3D measurement and accurate geospatial data collec- and refresh rate for autostereoscopic display of geospatial tion. Ordinary stereoscopic techniques require operators data. Despite these visualization-oriented studies, properties wearing glasses or using eyepieces for interpretation and and performance of autostereoscopic measurement are measurement. However, the recent emerging autostereoscopic unknown to the photogrammetric community. In this paper, technology makes it possible to eliminate this requirement. we focus on the metric properties of the autostereoscopic This paper studies the principles and implementation of display and evaluate its performance for photogrammetric autostereoscopic photogrammetric measurement and evalu- measurement. The paper starts with a brief introduction ates its performance. We first describe the principles and to the principles of the autostereoscopic technology. As properties of the parallax barrier-based autostereoscopic an important metric property, we quantitatively show the display used in this study. As an important metric property, autostereoscopic geometry, including viewing zones and we quantitatively present the autostereoscopic geometry, the boundary of operator’s movement for autostereoscopic including viewing zones and the boundary of a viewer’s perception. To carry out autostereoscopic measurement and movement for autostereoscopic measurement. A toolkit evaluate its performance, a photogrammetric toolkit, AUTO3D, AUTO3D is developed that has common photogrammetric is developed based on a DTI (Dimension Technologies, Inc., functions.
    [Show full text]
  • Content-Adaptive Parallax Barriers
    Content-Adaptive Parallax Barriers: Optimizing Dual-Layer 3D Displays using Low-Rank Light Field Factorization Douglas Lanman Matthew Hirsch Yunhee Kim Ramesh Raskar MIT Media Lab - Camera Culture Group http://cameraculture.media.mit.edu/contentadaptive Figure 1: 3D display with content-adaptive parallax barriers. We show that light field display using dual-stacked LCDs can be cast as a matrix approximation problem, leading to a new set of content-adaptive parallax barriers. (Left, Top) A 4D light field, represented as a 2D array of oblique projections. (Left, Bottom) A dual-stacked LCD displays the light field using content-adaptive parallax barriers, confirming both vertical and horizontal parallax. (Middle and Right) A pair of content-adaptive parallax barriers, drawn from a rank-9 decomposition of the reshaped 4D light field matrix. Compared to conventional parallax barriers, with heuristically-determined arrays of slits or pinholes, content adaptation allows increased display brightness and refresh rate while preserving the fidelity of projected images. Abstract 1 Introduction We optimize automultiscopic displays built by stacking a pair of Thin displays that present the viewer with the illusion of depth have modified LCD panels. To date, such dual-stacked LCDs have used become a driving force in the consumer electronics and entertain- heuristic parallax barriers for view-dependent imagery: the front ment industries, offering a differentiating feature in a market where LCD shows a fixed array of slits or pinholes, independent of the the utility of increasing 2D resolution has brought diminishing re- multi-view content. While prior works adapt the spacing between turns. In such systems, binocular depth cues are achieved by pre- slits or pinholes, depending on viewer position, we show both layers senting different images to each of the viewer’s eyes.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Overview Seefront‘S Approach to Glasses-Free 3D
    Technology Overview SeeFront‘s approach to glasses-free 3D 1 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 SeeFront‘s approach to glasses-free 3D Let the display wear the 3D glasses! 2 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Parallax barrier, switched ON 3 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Parallax barrier, switched OFF 4 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Nintendo 3DS Perceived resolution Good Number of users 1 Freedom of movement No Number of 3D views 1 Single-view 3D display without freedom of movement 5 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Multi-view display Lenticular array 6 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Multi-view display Multi-view 3D display with 8 views (schematic) 7 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Multi-view display Perceived resolution Poor Number of users >1 Freedom of movement Yes Number of 3D views 5-12 Multi-view 3D display with 6 views 8 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Integral Imaging 3D display Integral Imaging array (4x4 views) 9 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Integral Imaging 3D display Perceived resolution Poor Number of users >1 Freedom of movement Limited Number of 3D views 6 Integral Imaging 3D display (3x3 views) 10 © SeeFront GmbH 2013 Different approaches to Autostereoscopy: Integral Imaging 3D display Perceived resolution Poor Number of users >1 Freedom of movement Limited Number of 3D
    [Show full text]