Effect of interlacing methods of stereoscopic displays on perceived image quality

Abstract

To provide two-eyed views with one device, stereoscopic 3D (S3D) displays interlace the two views either temporally or spatially: temporal interlacing (TI) alternates the two views in time with full resolution, while spatial interlacing (SI) presents the two views simultaneously but with half resolution for each eye. We investigate the effect of interlacing methods on image quality through a psychophysical experiment. We compared four experimental conditions: three S3D interlacing methods (TI, SI with raw sampling, and SI with vertical interpolation), and one nonconventional interlacing method (vertical interpolation). The stimuli were 10 natural stereo images presented at nine levels of pixel sizes (0.64, 0.78, 0.89, 1.00, 1.28, 1.55, 1.78, 2.00, and 2.56 arcmin). To test the effect of interlacing methods per se, we provided all the experimental conditions to the subjects using a single experimental setup: a mirror stereoscope. The results show that TI does not degrade the image quality for any pixel size. SI degrades the image quality when the pixel size is relatively large, but the effect of the two SI methods does not differ significantly. Comparison of SI methods against the vertical interpolation method implies that the primary cause of the degradation in image quality for SI methods is the visibility of the interlacing pattern rather than the loss of high-frequency information.

Depth Artifacts Caused by Spatial Interlacing in Stereoscopic 3D Displays

“…As mentioned above, earlier research has suggested that pixel sizes 60 arcsec (Kelley, 2011), 32 arcsec (Kim andBanks, 2012), and 56 arcsec Park et al (2014) are sufficiently small for displaying content on interlacing stereoscopic displays. To prevent the visual system from resolving the content rows and black interstitial rows, the pixel size should be smaller than the visual acuity, which is 60 arcsec for individuals with 20/20 vision.…”

“…The majority of the participants in that experiment preferred the temporally interlaced condition because they experienced jagged edges in the spatially interlaced condition even though they could not see the black horizontal interlacing rows. Park et al (2014) used a two-alternative forced choice experiment to study the effect of the interlacing method on the perceived resolution of natural images. In addition to the temporal and spatial interlacing methods, they also included row-averaged non-interlaced and row-averaged interlaced methods, in which the vertical resolution was half of the original.…”

Analysis of the Different Influences of Additive or Subtractive Three-dimensional Crosstalk on the Level of the Visual Fatigue

“…3. The mirror stereoscope is composed of two display modules and a folded front-surface reflection mirror, which prevents a doubled image due to reflections at external and internal surfaces [10][11][12]. Since the path of the light rays from the left-display and the right-display are optically separated by the mirror as shown in Fig.…”

Resolution of Temporal-Multiplexing and Spatial-Multiplexing Stereoscopic Televisions

“…(1) They tested only one spatialmultiplexing method. Park, Kim, and Choi [9] tested sameline and alternate-line allocation, and found that perceived image quality was the same with the two allocation methods. They did not measure effective resolution.…”