Skip to Main Content
It is well known that the human visual system can perceive high frequency content in 3D, even if that information is present in only one of the views. Then, the best 3D perception quality may be achieved by allocating the rates of the reference (right) and auxiliary (left) views asymmetrically. However the question of whether the rate reduction for the auxiliary view should be achieved by spatial resolution reduction (coding a downsampled version of the video followed by upsampling after decoding) or quality (QP) reduction is an open issue. This paper shows that which approach should be preferred depends on the 3D display technology used at the receiver. Subjective tests indicate that users prefer lower quality (larger QP) coding of the auxiliary view over lower resolution coding if a Â¿full spatial resolutionÂ¿ 3D display technology (such as polarized projection) is employed. On the other hand, users prefer lower resolution coding of the auxiliary view over lower quality coding if a Â¿reduced spatial resolutionÂ¿ 3D display technology (such as parallax barrier - autostereoscopic) is used. Therefore, we conclude that for 3D IPTV services, while receiving full quality/resolution reference view, users should subscribe to differently scaled versions of the auxiliary view depending on their 3D display technology. We also propose an objective 3D video quality measure that takes the 3D display technology into account.