2009 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo 2009
DOI: 10.1109/icme.2009.5202586
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subjective and objective quality evaluation of lar coded art images

Abstract: Quality assessment is of major importance when designing and testing an image/video coding technique. Compression performances are usually evaluated by means of rate-distortion curves. However, the PSNR is commonly employed as the distortion measure. We hereby present a full quality assessment benchmark for the LAR (Locally Adaptive Resolution) coder. We conducted a subjective experiment, where nineteen observers were asked to assess the perceptual quality of LAR coded images under normalized viewing condition… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Self-extraction of regions of interest is also possible [4]. Furthermore, subjective quality image evaluation shows that the low resolution LAR picture is better than the same bit-rate JPEG2000 coded picture [5].…”
Section: Lar Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Self-extraction of regions of interest is also possible [4]. Furthermore, subjective quality image evaluation shows that the low resolution LAR picture is better than the same bit-rate JPEG2000 coded picture [5].…”
Section: Lar Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As can be seen from Table 1, experimental data are generated from original images . Various distortions are added to these images at different levels to form testing images whose quality is assessed via subjective rating by a certain number of observers (usually from [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. The testing methods frequently used are "Double stimulus categorical rating" (DCIS) and "Single stimulus categorical rating" (e.g., Absolute Category Rating (ACR).…”
Section: Related Work a Iqa Databasesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All existing databases evaluate subjective quality for full image while the quality in its regions is far different. Because [11] 2010 Full DMOS+σ 866 30 5 6 25 5-7 512×512 Custom IVC(I) [12,20] 2005 Full DMOS+σ 185 10 5 3 15 15 512×512 DSIS 65% IVC-3D [21] 2008 Full DMOS 90 6 5 3 19 19 512×512 SAMVIQ IVC-Art [22,23] 2009 Full Raw 120 8 5 3 19 19 512×512 DSIS LIVE(I) [8,17] 2006 Full DMOS+σ 779 29 7-8 5 20-29 768×512 ACR 88% MICT [13] 2008 Full Raw 196 14 5 2 16 16 768×512 ACR 61% MMSP-3D(I) [24] 2010 Full MOS+σ 54 9 4 1 27 27 768×512 ACR 62% TID2008 [9,25] 2008 of compressing or adding noise to the image, each region has its own characteristics resulting in annoying artifacts with which HVS has different sensitivity. Moreover, there is a minimum visibility threshold which no change can be perceived below [26].…”
Section: Related Work a Iqa Databasesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The VLIC dataset consists of 50 reference scenes coming from previous image compression and image quality studies. The stimuli are taken from the Rawzor's free dataset (14 images) 2 , CSIQ dataset (30 images) [9] and the subjective quality dataset in [10] (where we randomly selected 6 images from the 10 images in the dataset). For Rawzor's dataset, images were cropped to 960x600 pixels to fit on our screen.…”
Section: A Stimulimentioning
confidence: 99%