Comparison of Technologies for Three Dimensional Television with Respect to Viewing Experience Jämförelse av teknik för tredimensionell TV med avseende på bildupplevelse Henrik Sten Examensarbete inom Informations och kommunikationsteknik Högskoleingenjör Degree Project in Information and Communication Technology Stockholm, Sweden 2011 Kurs 6B2090, 15hp TRITA-ICT-EX-2011:149 July 2011 Report ison of technologies of technologies ison communication technology. communication Henrik Sten Henrik Compar dimensional forthree with to respect television experience viewing in electronics, optics and optics electronics, in Research and development and Research Acreo Comparison of technologies for three dimensional television with respect to viewing experience Henrik Sten © Acreo AB Kista • Norrköping • Hudiksvall 2011-07-08 Report no: acr050844 Acreo AB Isafjordsgatan 22 Bredgatan 34 Håstaholmen 4 Electrum 236 Box 787 SE-824 42 Hudiksvall SE-164 40 Kista SE-601 17 Norrköping www.acreo.se [email protected] Comparison of technologies for three dimensional television with respect to viewing experience Henrik Sten Supervisor: Kjell Brunnström Examinator: Anders Sjögren Location: Acreo AB Comparison of technologies for three dimensional television with respect to viewing experience Abstract This KTH Bachelor of Science level thesis, which was performed during spring 2011 at Acreo, investigates an alternative method of user evaluations for display- and video quality compared to those that are usually performed at Acreo. The investigated method involved engaging test participants for a comparably short time, but then instead be able to use higher number of participants. This method was applied to comparing two different stereoscopic 3D-TV technologies, one autostereoscopic and one with active shutter glasses. The report describes the preparations done, environments used, the collection of data and how it was analyzed. Furthermore, the 3D-TV technologies that have been used in this test will also be covered, as well as the 3D material and how it was produced. In addition the possible ways of distributing 3D material in a data network perspective, will also be described. Sammanfattning Den här högskoleingenjöruppsatsen, vilken utfördes under våren 2011 på Acreo undersöker en alternativ metod för att utföra utvärderingar av bildskärm och videokvalitet som vanligtvis genomförs på Acreo. Metoden innefattar att engagera varje testperson i jämförelsevis kort tid men istället möjliggöra att använda ett större antal testpersoner. Den här metoden tillämpades vid jämförelse av två olika stereoskopiska 3D-TV teknologier, en autostereoskopisk och en med aktiva slutarglasögon. Den här rapporten beskriver förberedelserna som gjorts, miljön som använts, insamlande av data och hur det analyserats. Vidare, beskrivs 3D-TV-teknologierna som använts i det här testet liksom materialet som visats och hur det är producerat, tillsammans med ett i datanätverkperspektiv hur 3D- material kan distribueras. Comparison of technologies for three dimensional television with respect to viewing experience Acknowledgment I would like to express my gratitude to the people at Acreo AB who opened up this door for me which made it possible to participate in this project. Explicitly thanks to Kjell Brunnström who had the role as manager, mentor and guide. Thanks to Börje Andrén and Kun Wang for helping during this project both with information and efforts during tests. Last but not least thanks to Wizzcom and Philips for providing with hardware, video material and knowledge to this project. Comparison of technologies for three dimensional television with respect to viewing experience Table of contents 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Problem description ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Short technology history.................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 3D overview ................................................................................................................................ 3 2.2.1 Color Multiplex .................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.2 Polarization Multiplexed ...................................................................................................... 5 2.2.3 Time Multiplex ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Autostereoscopy ......................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Distribution ................................................................................................................................. 8 2.4.1 3D distribution ..................................................................................................................... 9 2.4.2 3D over IP............................................................................................................................ 10 2.4.3 QoS (Quality of Service) ..................................................................................................... 11 2.5 Problems with 3D-TV ................................................................................................................ 11 3 Experience tests ............................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Method ..................................................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Preparations ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Tests and collecting of data ............................................................................................... 13 3.1.3 Data analysis ...................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Environment ............................................................................................................................. 15 3.3 Validity and reliability ............................................................................................................... 16 4 Results .............................................................................................................................................. 17 5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 22 6 References ....................................................................................................................................... 24 7 Appendix I Project definition ....................................................................................................... 25 I Project definition II Instruction to test person III Test questions IV Data sheet Alioscopy V Data sheet Philips Comparison of technologies for three dimensional television with respect to viewing experience 1 Introduction 3D imaging in itself is something far from new.... But recently starting about 2010, new or improved 3D-TV technologies are seen much more often on the markets around the world. SID (Dec 2010), DailyMail (2009) predicted “2010 is shaping up to be the year of 3D”. Manufacturers of 3DTVs and film producers seem to do enormous investments in 3D products in the hope that the market will be profitable. As with most things there are pros and cons and 3D technologies are no exception. This investigation would neither judge 3DTVs in general, nor predict its future but it will present 25 peoples spontaneous thoughts and reactions of it. The 3DTVs that are on the market today are based on the principle that human have two eyes and can get a 3D impression of its environment out of two slightly different 2D views of it. It is therefore often referred to as stereoscopic 3DTV, so the 3DTVs tries in different ways to present these two 2D views to the human observers. There are basically two types; 3DTVs that do not need eye-glasses and those that need eye-glasses to present 3D. Those that need eye-glasses are divided in passive and active eye-glasses. This investigation compares the visual performance of a 3DTV that does not need eye-glasses (autostereoscopic 3DTV) and a 3DTV that uses active shutter eye-glasses. 1.1 Problem description As in any project, planning is essential for the outcome to be as good as possible. When it comes to performing experience tests in public environments where there are no possibilities to repeat the tests or very expensive to do so it is even more important and it is valuable to do similar tests in advance. This is to prevent possible upcoming faults to be revealed and to get an idea of the time estimation. By setting up one of those tests at Acreo experience would be gained on how similar tests could be structured and be performed. Even though the object tested and the surrounding environment would be different this would set the frames of on how it could be done. By performing this test additional