skip to main content
research-article

Preference and artifact analysis for video transitions of places

Published: 19 August 2013 Publication History

Abstract

Emerging interfaces for video collections of places attempt to link similar content with seamless transitions. However, the automatic computer vision techniques that enable these transitions have many failure cases which lead to artifacts in the final rendered transition. Under these conditions, which transitions are preferred by participants and which artifacts are most objectionable? We perform an experiment with participants comparing seven transition types, from movie cuts and dissolves to image-based warps and virtual camera transitions, across five scenes in a city. This document describes how we condition this experiment on slight and considerable view change cases, and how we analyze the feedback from participants to find their preference for transition types and artifacts. We discover that transition preference varies with view change, that automatic rendered transitions are significantly preferred even with some artifacts, and that dissolve transitions are comparable to less-sophisticated rendered transitions. This leads to insights into what visual features are important to maintain in a rendered transition, and to an artifact ordering within our transitions.

Supplementary Material

tompkin (tompkin.zip)
Supplemental movie and image files for, Preference and artifact analysis for video transitions of places

References

[1]
Ballan, L., Brostow, G. J., Puwein, J., and Pollefeys, M. 2010. Unstructured video-based rendering: interactive exploration of casually captured videos.ACM Trans. Graph. 29, 4, 1.
[2]
Borg, I. and Groenen, P. 2010. Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications. Springer Series in Statistics.
[3]
Chaurasia, G., Sorkine, O., Drettakis, G., and Inria, R. 2011. Silhouette-aware warping for image-based rendering. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Symposium on Rendering.
[4]
Cui, C. 2000. Comparison of two psychophysical methods for image color quality measurement: paired comparison and rank order. In Proceedings of the 8th Color Imaging Conference on Color Science and Engineering Systems, Technologies and Applications (CIC'00). IS&T, 222--227.
[5]
Debevec, P., Yu, Y., and Borshukov, G. 1998. Efficient View-dependent image-based rendering with projective texturemapping. In Rendering Techniques 98: Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop, Number CSD-98-1003.
[6]
Debuchi, J. 1982. Frozen Time {film}.
[7]
Dmytryk, E. 1984. On Film Editing.
[8]
Eisemann, M., Decker, B. D., Magnor, M., Bekaert, P., de Aguiar, E., Ahmed, N., Theobalt, C., and Sellent, A. 2008. Floating textures. Comput. Graphics Forum 27, 2, 409--418.
[9]
Engeldrum, P. G. 2000. Psychometric Scaling: A Toolkit for Imaging Systems Development. Imcotek Press, Winchester, MA.
[10]
Fincher, D. 2002. Panic Room {film}.
[11]
Fischler, M. A. and Bolles, R. C. 1981. Random sample consensus: A paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Comm. ACM 24, 6, 381--395.
[12]
Furukawa, Y., Curless, B., Seitz, S. M., and Szeliski, R. 2010. Towards Internet-scale multi-view stereo. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 1434--1441.
[13]
Furukawa, Y. and Ponce, J. 2010. Accurate, dense, and robust multi-view stereopsis. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 32, 8, 1362--1376.
[14]
Goesele, M., Ackermann, J., Fuhrmann, S., Haubold, C., and Klowsky, R. 2010. Ambient point clouds for view interpolation. ACM Trans. Graph. 29, 4, 1--6.
[15]
Hartley, R. and Zisserman, A. 2004. Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision 2nd Ed. Cambridge University Press.
[16]
Horry, Y., Anjyo, K.-I. A., and Arai, K. 1997. Tour Into The Picture: Using a Spidery Mesh Interface to make Animation from a Single Image. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 225--232.
[17]
Kazhdan, M., Bolitho, M., and Hoppe, H. 2006. Poisson surface reconstruction. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Symposium on Geometry Processing. Eurographics Association, 61--70.
[18]
Lipski, C., Linz, C., Neumann, T., Wacker, M., and Magnor, M. 2010. High Resolution Image Correspondences for Video Post-Production. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Visual Media Production. IEEE, 33--39.
[19]
Lourakis, M. I. A. and Argyros, A. A. 2004. The design and implementation of a generic sparse bundle adjustment software package based on the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. ICSFORTH Tech. rep. TR 340, 340.
[20]
Lowe, D. G. 2004. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vision 60, 2, 91--110. Macmillan, J. 1984. Early Work {film}.
[21]
Mccurdy, N. J. 2007. RealityFlythrough: A system for ubiquitous video. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, San Diego.
[22]
Morvan, Y. and O'Sullivan, C. 2009a. A perceptual approach to trimming and tuning unstructured lumigraphs. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 5, 4, 19:1--19:24.
[23]
Morvan, Y. and O'Sullivan, C. 2009b. Handling occluders in transitions from panoramic images: A perceptual study. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 6, 4, 1--15.
[24]
Murch, W. 2001. In the Blink of an Eye. Silman-James Press.
[25]
Mustafa, M., Guthe, S., and Magnor, M. 2012. Single-trial EEG Classification of Artifacts in Videos. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 9, 3, 12:1--12:15.
[26]
Oh, B. M., Chen, M., Dorsey, J., and Durand, F. 2001. Image-based modeling and photo editing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. ACM Press, New York, 433--442.
[27]
Schaefer, S., Mcphail, T., and Warren, J. 2006. Image deformation using moving least squares. ACM Trans. Graph. 25, 3, 533.
[28]
Snavely, N., Garg, R., Seitz, S. M., and Szeliski, R. 2008. Finding paths through the world's photos. ACM Trans. Graph. 27, 3, 1.
[29]
Snavely, N., Seitz, S. M., and Szeliski, R. 2006. Photo tourism: Exploring photo collections in 3D. ACM Trans. Graph. 25, 835--846.
[30]
Stich, T., Linz, C., Wallraven, C., Cunningham, D., and Magnor, M. 2011. Perception-motivated interpolation of image sequences. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 8, 2, 11:1--11:25.
[31]
Thormählen, T. 2006. Zuverlässige Schä tzung der Kamerabewegung aus einer Bildfolge. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Hannover.
[32]
Tompkin, J., Kim, K. I., Kautz, J., and Theobalt, C. 2012. Videoscapes: Exploring Sparse, Unstructured Video Collections. ACM Trans. Graph. 31, 4.
[33]
Torgerson, W. S. 1958. Theory and Methods of Scaling. Wiley, New York.
[34]
Vangorp, P., Chaurasia, G., Laffont, P.-Y., Fleming, R. W., and Drettakis, G. 2011. Perception of visual artifacts in image-based rendering of façades. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Symposium on Rendering.
[35]
Vangorp, P., Richardt, C., Cooper, E. A., Chaurasia, G., Banks, M. S., and Drettakis, G. 2013. Perception of perspective distortions in image-based rendering. ACM Trans. Graph. 32, 4.

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)View-Dependent Effects for 360° Virtual Reality VideoProceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3379337.3415846(354-364)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2020

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Applied Perception
ACM Transactions on Applied Perception  Volume 10, Issue 3
Special issue SAP 2013
August 2013
83 pages
ISSN:1544-3558
EISSN:1544-3965
DOI:10.1145/2506206
Issue’s Table of Contents
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: 19 August 2013
Accepted: 01 July 2013
Received: 01 June 2013
Published in TAP Volume 10, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Video-based rendering
  2. video transition artifacts

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 28 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)View-Dependent Effects for 360° Virtual Reality VideoProceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3379337.3415846(354-364)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2020

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media