skip to main content
10.1145/3083187.3083190acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmsysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access
Best Student Paper

A Measurement Study of Oculus 360 Degree Video Streaming

Published:20 June 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

360 degree video is anew generation of video streaming technology that promises greater immersiveness than standard video streams. This level of immersiveness is similar to that produced by virtual reality devices -- users can control the field of view using head movements rather than needing to manipulate external devices. Although 360 degree video could revolutionize streaming technology, large scale adoption is hindered by a number of factors. 360 degree video streams have larger bandwidth requirements, require faster responsiveness to user inputs, and users may be more sensitive to lower quality streams.; AB@In this paper, we review standard approaches toward 360 degree video encoding and compare these to a new, as yet unpublished, approach by Oculus which we refer to as the offset cubic projection. Compared to the standard cubic encoding, the offset cube encodes a distorted version of the spherical surface, devoting more information (i.e., pixels) to the view in a chosen direction. We estimate that the offset cube representation can produce better or similar visual quality while using less than 50% pixels under reasonable assumptions about user behavior, resulting in 5.6% to 16.4% average savings in video bitrate. During 360 degree video streaming, Oculus uses a combination of quality level adaptation and view orientation adaptation. We estimate that this combination of streaming adaptation in two dimensions can cause over 57% extra segments to be downloaded compared to an ideal downloading strategy, wasting 20% of the total downloading bandwidth.

References

  1. Akamai's {state of the internet} q1 2016 report. https://www.akamai.com/uk/en/multimedia/documents/state-of-the-internet/akamai-state-of-the-internet-report-q1-2016.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Charles Proxy. https://www.charlesproxy.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Cubic Projection. http://wiki.panotools.org/Cubic_Projection.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Equirectangular Projection. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/EquirectangularProjection.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Facebook's 2 Billion Acquisition Of Oculus Closes, Now Official. https://techcrunch.com/2014/07/21/facebooks-acquisition-of-oculus-closes-now-official/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. FFmpeg. http://www.ffmpeg.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Great Cicle. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GreatCircle.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Internet Connection Speed Recommendations. https://help.netflix.com/en/node/306.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Lynxmotion Pan and Tilt Kit / Aluminium. http://www.robotshop.com/en/lynxmotion-pan-and-tilt-kit-aluminium2.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Next-generation video encoding techniques for 360 video and VR. https://code.facebook.com/posts/1126354007399553/next-generation-video-encoding-techniques-for-360-video-and-vr/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Nokia OZO. http://ozo.nokia.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. OneRepublic - Kids (360 version). https://www.facebook.com/OneRepublic/videos/10154946797263912/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. SPEEDTEST. http://www.speedtest.net/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Under the hood: Building 360 video. https://code.facebook.com/posts/1638767863078802/under-the-hood-building-360-video/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Xavier Corbillon, Alisa Devlic, Gwendal Simon, and Jacob Chakareski. Viewport-adaptive navigable 360-degree video delivery. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.08042, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. ISO/IEC 23009-1:2014 Information technology -- Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH) -- Part 1: Media presentation description and segment formats. Standard, International Organization for Standardization, May 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Daisuke Ochi, Yutaka Kunita, Akio Kameda, Akira Kojima, and Shinnosuke Iwaki. Live streaming system for omnidirectional video. In 2015 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), pages 349--350. IEEE, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Feng Qian, Lusheng Ji, Bo Han, and Vijay Gopalakrishnan. Optimizing 360 video delivery over cellular networks. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on All Things Cellular: Operations, Applications and Challenges, pages 1--6. ACM, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. David Salomon. Transformations and projections in computer graphics. Springer Science & Business Media, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Kay M Stanney, Ronald R Mourant, and Robert S Kennedy. Human factors issues in virtual environments: A review of the literature. Presence, 7(4):327--351, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Zhou Wang, Alan C Bovik, Hamid R Sheikh, and Eero P Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on, 13(4):600--612, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A Measurement Study of Oculus 360 Degree Video Streaming

      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'17: Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference
        June 2017
        407 pages
        ISBN:9781450350020
        DOI:10.1145/3083187

        Copyright © 2017 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: 20 June 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        MMSys'17 Paper Acceptance Rate13of47submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate176of530submissions,33%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader