Back to Search Document details
8th Meeting: Macau, October 2017 2017-10-16 20:08
AhG8: On viewport size and field of view
Abstract
This document investigates suitable viewport field of view (FOV) parameters for rendering of high definition resolutions viewports. Two viewport configurations were investigated and compared to the CTC conditions (i.e., 75×75 FOV and 1816×1816 resolution): 78.1×49.1 FOV and 116.7×84.8 FOV. Informal viewing was conducted to evaluate the suitability of both configurations. Observations made during the viewing are reported.
JVET-H0049 AhG8: On viewport size and field of view [P. Hanhart, Y. He, Y. Ye (InterDigital)]

This document investigates suitable viewport field of view (FOV) parameters for rendering of high definition resolutions viewports. Two viewport configurations were investigated and compared to the CTC conditions (i.e., 75×75 FOV and 1816×1816 resolution): 78.1×49.1 FOV and 116.7×84.8 FOV. Informal viewing was conducted to evaluate the suitability of both configurations. Observations made during the viewing are reported.

78.1x49.1 requires upsampling (approx. by 1.5) to be displayed on a full HD display.

It was agreed to organize a viewing session to judge (1) if compression artefacts are equivalently visible for the non-square viewports and (2) if yes, which non-square configuration is more suitable.

After the viewing session, it was decided to use the viewport size 78.1×49.1 FOV in the CfP.

Sentence(s) were added in the CfP to inform proponents about the viewport size, spatial resolution and bit depth, the interpolation filters that are used for generating it, and otherwise the same subjective viewing methodology will be used as described in annex C of the CfP.

Furthermore, annex E of the CfP was aligned concerning the reduction of number of metrics.

Philippe Hanhart was requested to take action on making these text modifications and give them to Andrew Segall for inclusion.

Decisions
Philippe Hanhart was requested to take action on making these text modifications and give them to Andrew Segall for inclusion.
Citation