Binocular tone mapping

By extending from monocular displays to binocular displays, one additional image domain is introduced. Existing binocular display systems only utilize this additional image domain for stereopsis. Our human vision is not only able to fuse two displaced images, but also two images with difference in detail, contrast and luminance, up to a certain limit. This phenomenon is known as binocular single vision. Humans can perceive more visual content via binocular fusion than just a linear blending of two views. In this paper, we make a first attempt in computer graphics to utilize this human vision phenomenon, and propose a binocular tone mapping framework. The proposed framework generates a binocular low-dynamic range (LDR) image pair that preserves more human-perceivable visual content than a single LDR image using the additional image domain. Given a tone-mapped LDR image (left, without loss of generality), our framework optimally synthesizes its counterpart (right) in the image pair from the same source HDR image. The two LDR images are different, so that they can aggregately present more human-perceivable visual richness than a single arbitrary LDR image, without triggering visual discomfort. To achieve this goal, a novel binocular viewing comfort predictor (BVCP) is also proposed to prevent such visual discomfort. The design of BVCP is based on the findings in vision science. Through our user studies, we demonstrate the increase of human-perceivable visual richness and the effectiveness of the proposed BVCP in conservatively predicting the visual discomfort threshold of human observers.

[1]  Jing Zhang,et al.  Multi-agent Based Virtual Environment and Its Application , 2009 .

[2]  Behzad Mansouri,et al.  Binocular summation of contrast remains intact in strabismic amblyopia. , 2007, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[3]  Anne Treisman,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Stereoscopic Depth Perception , 1962 .

[4]  Hans-Peter Seidel,et al.  A perceptual framework for contrast processing of high dynamic range images , 2006, TAP.

[5]  C. Tyler,et al.  Failure of rivalry at low contrast: Evidence of a suprathreshold binocular summation process , 1992, Vision Research.

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

[7]  Sheng-Jyh Wang,et al.  The use of visible color difference in the quantitative evaluation of color image segmentation , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[8]  Erik Reinhard,et al.  High Dynamic Range Imaging: Acquisition, Display, and Image-Based Lighting (The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Computer Graphics) , 2005 .

[9]  Mtm Marc Lambooij,et al.  Visual Discomfort and Visual Fatigue of Stereoscopic Displays: A Review , 2009 .

[10]  O. Braddick,et al.  Seeing in Depth , 2008 .

[11]  Andrew B. Watson,et al.  The cortex transform: rapid computation of simulated neural images , 1987 .

[12]  Dani Lischinski,et al.  Gradient Domain High Dynamic Range Compression , 2023 .

[13]  Matthias Wöpking,et al.  Viewing comfort with stereoscopic pictures : an experimental study on the subjective effects of disparity magnitude and depth of focus , 1995 .

[14]  W. Levelt,et al.  BINOCULAR BRIGHTNESS AVERAGING AND CONTOUR INFORMATION. , 1965, British journal of psychology.

[15]  Peter Gregor,et al.  Binocular single vision achieved by fusion and suppression , 1977 .

[16]  Clifton M. Schor,et al.  The spatial properties of binocular suppression zone , 1994, Vision Research.

[17]  W. PEDDIE,et al.  Helmholtz's Treatise on Physiological Optics , 1926, Nature.

[18]  Marcel P. Lucassen,et al.  Visual comfort of binocular and 3D displays , 2001, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[19]  Gordon Heron,et al.  Visual adaptation to interocular brightness differences induced by neutral-density filters. , 2007, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  Thomas T. Norton,et al.  Psychophysical Measurement of Visual Function , 2002 .

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

[22]  Robert P. O’Shea,et al.  Does stereopsis have a fusional component? , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  Erik Reinhard,et al.  09 – Image-based Lighting , 2006 .

[24]  Rafael Huertas,et al.  Ultra-large color difference and small subtense , 2010 .

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

[26]  Erik Reinhard,et al.  High Dynamic Range Imaging: Acquisition, Display, and Image-Based Lighting , 2010 .

[27]  H. von Helmholtz,et al.  Helmholtz's treatise on physiological optics, Vol. 1, Trans. from the 3rd German ed. , 1924 .

[28]  Daum M. Kent,et al.  Foundations of Binocular Vision: A Clinical Perspective. , 2001 .

[29]  Mao-Hai Lin,et al.  Analysis of Color Difference in Digital Proofing Based on Color Management System , 2009 .

[30]  Karol Myszkowski,et al.  The Visible Differences Predictor: Applications to Global Illumination Problems , 1998, Rendering Techniques.

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

[32]  Karol Myszkowski,et al.  Adaptive Logarithmic Mapping For Displaying High Contrast Scenes , 2003, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[33]  Alexei A. Efros,et al.  Fast bilateral filtering for the display of high-dynamic-range images , 2002 .

[34]  Christine D. Piatko,et al.  A visibility matching tone reproduction operator for high dynamic range scenes , 1997, SIGGRAPH '97.

[35]  W. Ehrenstein,et al.  Eye preference within the context of binocular functions , 2005, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[36]  R. Blake,et al.  The precedence of binocular fusion over binocular rivalry , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.