Binocular tone mapping

ACM Transactions on Graphics

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2012, Pages

  Yang, Xuan ^a   Zhang, Linling ^a   Wong, Tien Tsin ^a   Heng, Pheng Ann ^a  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Binocular vision; HDR; Psychophysical; Singleness of vision; Tone mapping; Visual perception

Indexed keywords

BINOCULAR DISPLAY; BINOCULAR VIEWING; HDR; HDR IMAGE; HUMAN OBSERVERS; HUMAN VISION; IMAGE DOMAIN; IMAGE PAIRS; MONOCULAR DISPLAYS; PSYCHOPHYSICAL; SINGLE VISION; TONE MAPPING; USER STUDY; VISION SCIENCE; VISUAL CONTENT; VISUAL DISCOMFORT; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

BINOCULAR VISION; BLENDING; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; DISPLAY DEVICES; GOGGLES; MAPPING;

BINOCULARS;

EID: 84872221331     PISSN: 07300301     EISSN: 15577368     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/2185520.2185589     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. BAKER, D., MEESE, T., MANSOURI, B., AND HESS, R. 2007. Binocular summation of contrast remains intact in strabismic amblyopia. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science 48, 11, 5332.
2. BLAKE, R., AND BOOTHROYD, K. 1985. The precedence of binocular fusion over binocular rivalry. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 37, 2, 114-124.
3. CARTER, R., AND HUERTAS, R. 2010. Ultra-large color difference and small subtense. Color Research & Application 35, 1, 4-17.
4. CHEN, H., AND WANG, S. 2004. The use of visible color difference in the quantitative evaluation of color image segmentation. In Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2004. Proceedings.(ICASSP'04). IEEE International Conference on, vol. 3, IEEE, iii-593.
5. DALY, S. 1993. The visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity. Digital images and human vision 11.
6. DRAGO, F., MYSZKOWSKI, K., ANNEN, T., AND CHIBA, N. 2003. Adaptive logarithmic mapping for displaying high contrast scenes. In Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 22, Wiley Online Library, 419-426.
7. DURAND, F., AND DORSEY, J. 2002. Fast bilateral filtering for the display of high-dynamic-range images. In Proceedings of the 29th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, ACM, 257-266.
8. EHRENSTEIN, W., ARNOLD-SCHULZ-GAHMEN, B., AND JASCHINSKI, W. 2005. Eye preference within the context of binocular functions. Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 243, 9, 926-932.
9. FATTAL, R., LISCHINSKI, D., AND WERMAN, M. 2002. Gradient domain high dynamic range compression. ACM Transactions on Graphics 21, 3, 249-256.
10. HOWARD, I., AND ROGERS, B. 2002. Seeing in Depth, vol. 1. I Porteous.
11. KOOI, F., AND TOET, A. 2004. Visual comfort of binocular and 3D displays. Displays 25, 2-3, 99-108.
12. LAMBOOIJ, M., IJSSELSTEIJN, W., FORTUIN, M., AND HEYNDERICKX, I. 2009. Visual discomfort and visual fatigue of stereoscopic displays: a review. Journal of Imaging Science and Technology 53, 030201.
13. LARSON, G., RUSHMEIER, H., AND PIATKO, C. 1997. A visibility matching tone reproduction operator for high dynamic range scenes. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on 3, 4, 291-306.
14. LEI, L., AND SCHOR, C. 1994. The spatial properties of binocular suppression zone. Vision research 34, 7, 937-947.
15. LEVELT, W. 1965. Binocular brightness averaging and contour information. British journal of psychology 56.
16. LIN, M., AND JANE, S. 2009. Analysis of color difference in digital proofing based on color management system. Journal of Communication and Computer 6, 10, 32.
17. LIU, L., TYLER, C., AND SCHOR, C. 1992. Failure of rivalry at low contrast: Evidence of a suprathreshold binocular summation process. Vision Research 32, 8, 1471-1479.
18. MACMILLAN, E., GRAY, L., AND HERON, G. 2007. Visual Adaptation to Interocular Brightness Differences Induced by Neutral-Density Filters. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science 48, 2, 935.
19. MANTIUK, R., DALY, S., MYSZKOWSKI, K., AND SEIDEL, H. 2005. Predicting visible differences in high dynamic range images: model and its calibration. In Proc. SPIE, vol. 5666, SPIE, 204-214.
20. MANTIUK, R., MYSZKOWSKI, K., AND SEIDEL, H. 2006. A perceptual framework for contrast processing of high dynamic range images. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 3, 3, 286-308.
21. MANTIUK, R., KIM, K., REMPEL, A., AND HEIDRICH, W. 2011. Hdr-vdp-2: A calibrated visual metric for visibility and quality predictions in all luminance conditions. In ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), vol. 30, ACM, 40.
22. MYSZKOWSKI, K. 1998. The visible differences predictor: Applications to global illumination problems. In Rendering techniques' 98: proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop in Vienna, Austria, June 29-July 1, 1998, Springer Verlag Wien, 223.
23. NORTON, T., CORLISS, D., AND BAILEY, J. 2002. The psy-chophysical measurement of visual function. Butterworth Heinemann.
24. ONO, H., ANGUS, R., AND GREGOR, P. 1977. Binocular single vision achieved by fusion and suppression. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 21, 6, 513-521.
25. O'SHEA, R. 1983. Does stereopsis have a fusional component? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 34, 6, 599-603.
26. REINHARD, E. 2006. High dynamic range imaging: acquisition, display, and image-based lighting. Morgan Kaufmann.
27. STEINMAN, S., STEINMAN, B., AND GARZIA, R. 2000. Foundations of binocular vision: A clinical perspective. McGraw-Hill Medical.
28. TREISMAN, A. 1962. Binocular rivalry and stereoscopic depth perception. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 14, 1, 23-37.
29. VON HELMHOLTZ, H. 1962. Helmholtz's treatise on physiological optics, vol. 3. The Optical Society of America.
30. WANG, Z., BOVIK, A., SHEIKH, H., AND SIMONCELLI, E. 2004. Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on 13, 4, 600-612.
31. WATSON, A. 1987. The cortex transform: rapid computation of simulated neural images. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing 39, 3, 311-327.
32. WOPKING, M. 1995. Viewing comfort with stereoscopic pictures: An experimental study on the subjective effects of disparity magnitude and depth of focus. Journal of the Society for Information Display 3, 3, 101-103.