Koichi Shimono

Stereoscopic 3D-TV: Visual Comfort

Among the key topics of discussion and research on three-dimensional television (3D-TV), visual comfort is certainly one of the most critical. This is because it is well known that some viewers experience visual discomfort when looking at stereoscopic displays. It is important to properly address the issue of visual comfort to avoid possible delays in the deployment of 3D-TV. Here we present a concise overview of the main topics relevant to comfort in viewing stereoscopic television and survey the key factors influencing visual comfort. Potential end users of 3D-TV, content creators, program providers, broadcasters, display manufacturers and researchers will find this overview useful.

Methodological caveats for monitoring binocular eye position with Nonius stimuli

Three experiments, using two sets of Nonius lines placed in a random-dot stereogram, indicated that Nonius alignment does not always reflect binocular eye position and, thus, a caveat is necessary when Nonius alignment is used to monitor binocular eye position. We found that: (a) two Nonius lines with visual line values that differed by up to 7.6 min of arc can appear aligned; (b) the two lines of each of the two Nonius sets continued to appear aligned despite a change in vergence angle of 5.9 min of arc; and (c) the Nonius alignment reflected eye position better, when the binocular dots near the Nonius lines were eliminated.

Monocular alignment in different depth planes

We examined (a) whether vertical lines at different physical horizontal positions in the same eye can appear to be aligned, and (b), if so, whether the difference between the horizontal positions of the aligned vertical lines can vary with the perceived depth between them. In two experiments, each of two vertical monocular lines was presented (in its respective rectangular area) in one field of a random-dot stereopair with binocular disparity. In Experiment 1, 15 observers were asked to align a line in an upper area with a line in a lower area. The results indicated that when the lines appeared aligned, their horizontal physical positions could differ and the direction of the difference coincided with the type of disparity of the rectangular areas; this is not consistent with the law of the visual direction of monocular stimuli. In Experiment 2, 11 observers were asked to report relative depth between the two lines and to align them. The results indicated that the difference of the horizontal position did not covary with their perceived relative depth, suggesting that the visual direction and perceived depth of the monocular line are mediated via different mechanisms.

Mirror vision: Perceived size and perceived distance of virtual images

We investigated spatial perception of virtual images that were produced by convex and plane mirrors. In Experiment 1, 36 subjects reproduced both the perceived size and the perceived distance of virtual images for five targets that had been placed at a real distance of 10 or 20 m. In Experiment 2, 30 subjects verbally judged both the perceived size and the perceived distance of virtual images for five targets that were placed at each of five real distances of 2.5–45 m. In both experiments, the subjects received objective-size and objective-distance instructions. The results were that (1) size constancy was attained for a distance of up to 45 m, (2) distance was readily discriminated within this distance range, although virtual images produced by the mirror of strong curvature were judged to be farther away than those produced by the mirrors of less curvature, and (3) the ratio of perceived size to perceived distance was described as a power function of visual angle, and the ratio for the convex mirror was larger than that for the plane mirror. We compared the taking-into-account model and the direct perception model on the basis of a correlation analysis for proximal, virtual, and real levels of the stimuli. The taking-into-account model, which assumes that visual angle is transformed into perceived size by taking perceived distance into account, was supported by an analysis for the proximal level of stimuli. The direct perception model, which assumes that there is no inferential process between perceived size and perceived distance, was partially supported by an analysis for the distal level of the stimuli.

How accurate is size and distance perception for very far terrestrial objects ? Function and causality

This study investigated absolute estimation of size and distance for natural and artificial objects at viewing distances of 1.1–15.3 km (Experiments 1 and 2) and 0.4–5.0 m (Experiment 3). The main results were that, regardless of distance range, size and distance estimates (S′ andD′) were related to objective size and distance (S andD), respectively, by a power function with an exponent of unity, but great individual differences in exponent were obtained for the far objects. The ratioS′/D′ was reasonably represented byS′/D′ =Kθn andS′/D′ = tan(aθ +b), rather thanS′/D′ = tan θ, where θ is the visual angle. Partial correlations were obtained to examine whether (1) apparent size is determined by taking apparent distance into account or (2) both apparent size and apparent distance are determined directly by external stimuli. The combined data for the far objects and the data for the close objects showed that there were high correlations betweenS andS′ and betweenD andD′ and a low correlation betweenD′ andS′. The data of Experiment 2 showed that bothD′ andS′ were highly correlated withS D, and θ, and there was a high positive correlation betweenD′ andS′. It was suggested that the direct-perception model is valid under some situations, but the taking-into-account model is not supported in any set of data.

Visual Directions of Two Stimuli in Panum's Limiting Case

Visual directions of the two stimuli in Panums limiting case with different interstimulus and convergence distances confirmed the predictions from the reformulated Wells—Herings laws of visual direction. In experiment 1, six observers each converged on the midpoint of the interstimulus axis at 30, 60, and 90 cm from the eyes and adjusted a probe on the fixation plane to be in the same visual direction as that of each stimulus. Visual direction of the far stimulus was always nonveridical whereas that of the near stimulus was veridical only when its retinal disparity was small. In experiment 2, three observers each converged on the intersection of mid-sagittal plane and (a) the frontoparallel plane of the near stimulus, (b) that of the midpoint between the two stimuli, or (c) that of the far stimulus. The midpoint of the interstimulus axis was 60 cm from the eyes. Visual direction of the far stimulus was veridical only with convergence at the far plane. Visual direction of the near stimulus was veridical with convergence at the near plane, and also, only when its retinal disparity was small, with convergence at the two other planes.

Localization of monocular stimuli in different depth planes

We examined the phenomenon in which two physically aligned monocular stimuli appear to be non-collinear when each of them is located in binocular regions that are at different depth planes. Using monocular bars embedded in binocular random-dot areas that are at different depths, we manipulated properties of the binocular areas and examined their effect on the perceived direction and depth of the monocular stimuli. Results showed that (1) the relative visual direction and perceived depth of the monocular bars depended on the binocular disparity and the dot density of the binocular areas, and (2) the visual direction, but not the depth, depended on the width of the binocular regions. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that monocular stimuli are treated by the visual system as binocular stimuli that have acquired the properties of their binocular surrounds. Moreover, partial correlation analysis suggests that the visual system utilizes both the disparity information of the binocular areas and the perceived depth of the monocular bars in determining the relative visual direction of the bars.

Perceived distance of targets in convex mirrors

We investigated the perceived distance of targets in convex and plane mirrors. In Experiment 1, 20 subjects matched the distance of targets in a real scene to the distance of a virtual target in different mirrors. The matched distances were much larger for convex mirrors than for a plane mirror. In Experiment 2, 20 subjects viewed two targets in a mirror and adjusted their own positions so that the distance to the closer target was perceived to equal the distance between the targets. The mean distance to the closer target was smaller for the convex mirrors than for the plane mirror. In Experiment 3, 20 subjects adjusted the position of a target so that the distance to it in a mirror was perceived to equal the distance designated by the experimenter. The best-fitting power functions showed that the scaling factors were larger for the convex mirrors than for the plane mirror, but the exponents were smaller for the convex mirrors than for the plane mirror. It is suggested that distance in the convex mirrors was perceived to be larger than in the plane mirror, and that the growth of perceived distance in the convex mirrors was slower than in the plane mirror.

Wheatstone-Panum limiting case: occlusion, camouflage, and vergence-induced disparity cues.

We examined effects of binocular occlusion, binocular camouflage, and vergence-induced disparity cues on the perceived depth between two objects when two stimuli are presented to one eye and a single stimulus to the other (Wheatstone—Panum limiting case). The perceived order and magnitude of the depth were examined in two experimental conditions: (1) The stimulus was presented on the temporal side (occlusion condition) and (2) the nasal side (camouflage condition) of the stimulus pair on one retina so as to fuse with the single stimulus on the other retina. In both conditions, the separation between the stimulus pair presented to one eye was systematically varied. Experiment 1, with 16 observers, showed that the fused object was seen in front of the nonfused object in the occlusion condition and was seen at the same distance as the nonfused object in the camouflage condition. The perceived depth between the two objects was constant and did not depend on the separation of the stimulus pair presented to one eye. Experiment 2, with 45 observers, showed that the disparity induced by vergence mainly determined the perceived depth, and the depth magnitude increased as the separation of the stimulus pair was made wider. The results suggest that (1) occlusion provides depth-order information but not depth-magnitude information, (2) camouflage provides neither depth-order nor depth-magnitude information, and (3) vergence-induced disparity provides both order and magnitude information.

Apparent motion of monocular stimuli in different depth planes with lateral head movements.

A stationary monocular stimulus appears to move concomitantly with lateral head movements when it is embedded in a stereogram representing two front-facing rectangular areas, one above the other at two different distances. In Experiment 1, we found that the extent of perceived motion of the monocular stimulus covaried with the amplitude of head movement and the disparity between the two rectangular areas (composed of random dots). In Experiment 2, we found that the extent of perceived motion of the monocular stimulus was reduced compared to that in Experiment 1 when the rectangular areas were defined only by an outline rather than by random dots. These results are discussed using the hypothesis that a monocular stimulus takes on features of the binocular surface area in which it is embedded and is perceived as though it were treated as a binocular stimulus with regards to its visual direction and visual depth.