On the Efficiency of Image Metrics for Evaluating the Visual Quality of 3D Models

3D meshes are deployed in a wide range of application processes (e.g., transmission, compression, simplification, watermarking and so on) which inevitably introduce geometric distortions that may alter the visual quality of the rendered data. Hence, efficient model-based perceptual metrics, operating on the geometry of the meshes being compared, have been recently introduced to control and predict these visual artifacts. However, since the 3D models are ultimately visualized on 2D screens, it seems legitimate to use images of the models (i.e., snapshots from different viewpoints) to evaluate their visual fidelity. In this work we investigate the use of image metrics to assess the visual quality of 3D models. For this goal, we conduct a wide-ranging study involving several 2D metrics, rendering algorithms, lighting conditions and pooling algorithms, as well as several mean opinion score databases. The collected data allow (1) to determine the best set of parameters to use for this image-based quality assessment approach and (2) to compare this approach to the best performing model-based metrics and determine for which use-case they are respectively adapted. We conclude by exploring several applications that illustrate the benefits of image-based quality assessment.

[1]  Wolfgang Heidrich,et al.  HDR-VDP-2: a calibrated visual metric for visibility and quality predictions in all luminance conditions , 2011, ACM Trans. Graph..

[2]  Michael Garland,et al.  Surface simplification using quadric error metrics , 1997, SIGGRAPH.

[3]  Azeddine Beghdadi,et al.  A survey of perceptual image processing methods , 2013, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[4]  Alan C. Bovik,et al.  Automatic prediction of perceptual quality of multimedia signals—a survey , 2010, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[5]  Libor Vása,et al.  Perceptual Metrics for Static and Dynamic Triangle Meshes , 2013, Eurographics.

[6]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  New measurements reveal weaknesses of image quality metrics in evaluating graphics artifacts , 2012, ACM Trans. Graph..

[7]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  Predicting visible differences in high dynamic range images: model and its calibration , 2005, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[8]  Qing Zhu,et al.  Quantitative analysis of discrete 3D geometrical detail levels based on perceptual metric , 2010, Comput. Graph..

[9]  Guillaume Lavoué,et al.  A Multiscale Metric for 3D Mesh Visual Quality Assessment , 2011, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[10]  Greg Turk,et al.  Image-driven simplification , 2000, TOGS.

[11]  M. Reddy,et al.  SCROOGE:Perceptually‐Driven Polygon Reduction , 1996, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[12]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Modern Image Quality Assessment , 2006, Modern Image Quality Assessment.

[13]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Information Content Weighting for Perceptual Image Quality Assessment , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[14]  Libor Vása,et al.  Dihedral Angle Mesh Error: a fast perception correlated distortion measure for fixed connectivity triangle meshes , 2012, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[15]  Gustavo de Veciana,et al.  An information fidelity criterion for image quality assessment using natural scene statistics , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[16]  Scott J. Daly,et al.  Visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity , 1992, Electronic Imaging.

[17]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[18]  J. I.  The Design of Experiments , 1936, Nature.

[19]  Benjamin Watson,et al.  Measuring and predicting visual fidelity , 2001, SIGGRAPH.

[20]  Dietmar Saupe,et al.  Evaluation of supra-threshold perceptual metrics for 3D models , 2006, APGV '06.

[21]  Jeffrey Lubin,et al.  A VISUAL DISCRIMINATION MODEL FOR IMAGING SYSTEM DESIGN AND EVALUATION , 1995 .

[22]  Ghassan Al-Regib,et al.  FQM: a fast quality measure for efficient transmission of textured 3D models , 2004, MULTIMEDIA '04.

[23]  Guillaume Lavoué,et al.  A local roughness measure for 3D meshes and its application to visual masking , 2009, TAP.

[24]  Mohammed Ghanbari,et al.  The accuracy of PSNR in predicting video quality for different video scenes and frame rates , 2012, Telecommun. Syst..

[25]  T. Ebrahimi,et al.  Watermarked 3-D Mesh Quality Assessment , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.

[26]  F. Wilcoxon.  Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods , 1945 .

[27]  D. Chandler.  Seven Challenges in Image Quality Assessment: Past, Present, and Future Research , 2013 .

[28]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  Learning to Predict Localized Distortions in Rendered Images , 2013, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[29]  Gary W. Meyer,et al.  Perceptually Guided Polygon Reduction , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[30]  Matthias Zwicker,et al.  Ieee Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics Ewa Splatting , 2002 .

[31]  Kai Wang,et al.  A Curvature Tensor Distance for Mesh Visual Quality Assessment , 2012, ICCVG.

[32]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  NoRM: No‐Reference Image Quality Metric for Realistic Image Synthesis , 2012, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[33]  Alan C. Bovik,et al.  Image information and visual quality , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[34]  Michael Guthe,et al.  Towards Perceptual Simplification of Models with Arbitrary Materials , 2010, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[35]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  Visible difference predicator for high dynamic range images , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37583).

[36]  Craig Gotsman,et al.  Spectral compression of mesh geometry , 2000, EuroCG.

[37]  Christophe Charrier,et al.  Quality Assessment Approaches , 2012 .

[38]  Paolo Cignoni,et al.  Metro: Measuring Error on Simplified Surfaces , 1998, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[39]  Gary W. Meyer,et al.  A perceptually based adaptive sampling algorithm , 1998, SIGGRAPH.

[40]  David Zhang,et al.  FSIM: A Feature Similarity Index for Image Quality Assessment , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[41]  Christophe Charrier,et al.  Quality assessment of still images , 2013 .

[42]  David Zhang,et al.  A comprehensive evaluation of full reference image quality assessment algorithms , 2012, 2012 19th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[43]  Adam Finkelstein,et al.  Perceptual models of viewpoint preference , 2011, TOGS.

[44]  Massimiliano Corsini,et al.  A Comparison of Perceptually-Based Metrics for Objective Evaluation of Geometry Processing , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.

[45]  D. Todd,et al.  The Sun , 1870, Nature.

[46]  David P. Luebke,et al.  Perceptually-Driven Simplification for Interactive Rendering , 2001, Rendering Techniques.

[47]  Guillaume Lavoué,et al.  Progressive compression of generic surface meshes , 2015, CGI 2015.

[48]  Irene Cheng,et al.  Quality metric for approximating subjective evaluation of 3-D objects , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.

[49]  Samuel S. Silva,et al.  Comparison of methods for the simplification of mesh models using quality indices and an observer study , 2007, Electronic Imaging.

[50]  Touradj Ebrahimi,et al.  Perceptually driven 3D distance metrics with application to watermarking , 2006, SPIE Optics + Photonics.

[51]  Zhou Wang,et al.  Multi-scale structural similarity for image quality assessment , 2003 .

[52]  Kai Wang,et al.  A fast roughness-based approach to the assessment of 3D mesh visual quality , 2012, Comput. Graph..

[53]  William E. Lorensen,et al.  Decimation of triangle meshes , 1992, SIGGRAPH.

[54]  Maneesh Agrawala,et al.  The assumed light direction for perceiving shape from shading , 2008, APGV '08.

[55]  Bernice E. Rogowitz,et al.  Are image quality metrics adequate to evaluate the quality of geometric objects? , 2001, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.