Full Reference Mesh Visual Quality Assessment Using Pre-Trained Deep Network and Quality Indices

Abouelaziz, Ilyass; Chetouani, Aladine; Mohammed, El Hassouni; Cherifi, Hocine

doi:10.1109/sitis.2019.00113

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examples of institutions that contribute guidelines to 3D workflows are The European Commission, 56 Riksantikvarieämbetet, 57 Federal Agencies Guidelines Initiative, 58 Europeana, 59 The London Charter, 60 Cultural Heritage Imaging, 61 and the International Image Interoperability Framework (IIIF) Consortium. 62 In Table 2 we have provided a table that covers what features each proposal provides suggestions to.…”

Section: Workflows For Acquisition and Processing Of 3d Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3D objects might be evaluated of different quality from different viewing distances, and objects of less complexity might also be easier to visualize accurately with less geometry. Several automatic metrics also exist, but are targeted at visual quality saliency [56][57][58][59][60][61][62]. As such, the simple increase in 3D resolution does not necessarily increase the quality of the 3D object, and might have little to no effect on both subjective or objective evaluations.…”

Section: Workflows For Acquisition and Processing Of 3d Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Standardization of digitized heritage: a review of implementations of 3D in cultural heritage

Storeide,

George,

Sole

et al. 2023

Herit Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The value of three-dimensional virtual objects are proven in a great variety of applications; their flexibility allowing for a substantial amount of utilization purposes. In cultural heritage this has been used for many years already, and the amount of users continue to grow as acquisition methods and implementations are becoming more approachable. Nonetheless, there are still many apparent issues with making use of all the possible benefits of 3D data in the field, varying from lack of knowledge, infrastructure, or coherent workflows. This review aims to underline the current limitations in implementing 3D workflows for various cultural heritage purposes. 45 projects and institutions are reviewed, along with the most prominent guidelines for workflows and ways of implementing the 3D data on the web. We also cover how each project manage and make their data accessible to the public. Prominent and recurring issues with standardization, interoperability, and implementation is highlighted and scrutinized. The review is concluded with a discussion on the current utilization’s of 3D data for cultural heritage purposes, along with suggestions for future developments.

show abstract