Can small be beautiful?: assessing image resolution requirements for mobile TV

ABSTRACT

Mobile TV services are now being offered in several countries, but for cost reasons, most of these services offer material directly recoded for mobile consumption (i.e. without additional editing). The experiment reported in this paper, aims to assess the image resolution and bitrate requirements for displaying this type of material on mobile devices. The study, with 128 participants, examined responses to four different image resolutions, seven video encoding bitrates, two audio bitrates and four content types. The results show that acceptability is significantly lower for images smaller than 168x126, regardless of content type. The effect is more pronounced when bandwidth is abundant, and is due to important detail being lost in the smaller screens. In contrast to previous studies, participants are more likely to rate image quality as unacceptable when the audio quality is high.

REFERENCES

• 1: Reimers, U. Digital Video Broadcasting IEEE Communications Magazine, 36 (6) 1998.
• 2: IEEE Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications (Rep. No. IEEE 802.11) The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 1999.
• 3: Narenthiran, K., Karaliopoulos, M., Tafazolli, R., Evans, B. G., Vincent, P., Selier, C. et al. S-DMB System Architecture and the MODIS DEMO in IST Mobile and Wireless Communications Summit 2003, 2003
• 4: ITU-T End-user multimedia QoS categories (Rep. No. G.1010), 2001.
• 5: Jain, R. Quality of Experience IEEE Multimedia, 11, p. 95--6, 2004.
• 6: Owens, D. A. & Wolfe-Kelly, K. Near Work, Visual Fatigue, and Variations of Oculomotor Tonus Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 28, p. 743--9, 1987.
• 7: Ankrum, D. R. Viewing Distance at Computer Workstations Work Place Ergonomics, p. 10--2, Sep/Oct 1996.
• 8: Weiner, R. Webster's New World Dictionary of Media and Communications (rev. and updated ed.) New York, NY: Macmillan, 1996
• 9: Knoche, H. & McCarthy, J. Mobile Users' Needs and Expectations of Future Multimedia Services in Proceedings of the WWRF12, 2004
• 10: Winkler, S. & Dufaux, F. Video Quality for Mobile Applications in Proc.of SPIE, p. 593--603, 2005
• 11: Winkler, S. & Faller, C. Audiovisual quality evaluation of low-bitrate video in Proc.SPIE/IS&T Human Vision and Electronic Imaging, p. 139--48, 2005
• 12: John D. McCarthy , M. Angela Sasse , Dimitrios Miras, Sharp or smooth?: comparing the effects of quantization vs. frame rate for streamed video, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.535-542, April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria [doi>10.1145/985692.985760]
• 13: Winkler, S. & Faller, C. Maximizing audiovisual quality at low bitrates in Proc.of Workshop on Video Processing and Quality Metrics, 2005
• 14: Wikstrand, G. & Sun, J. Determining utility functions for streaming low bitrate football video in Proc.of IMSA 2004, 2004
• 15: Bryon Reeves , Clifford Nass, The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1998
• 16: Lombard, M., Grabe, M. E., Reich, R. D., Campanella, C., Ditton, T. B. Screen Size and viewer responses to television: A review of research in Annual Conf.of the Assoc.for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 1996
• 17: Ken-Ichi Okada , Fumihiko Maeda , Yusuke Ichikawaa , Yutaka Matsushita, Multiparty videoconferencing at virtual social distance: MAJIC design, Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, p.385-393, October 22-26, 1994, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States [doi>10.1145/192844.193054]
• 18: William A. S. Buxton, Telepresence: integrating shared task and person spaces, Proceedings of the conference on Graphics interface '92, p.123-129, September 1992, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
• 19: Reeves, B., Lang, A., Kim, E., Tartar, D. The effects of screen size and message content on attention and arousal Media Psychology, 1, p. 49--68, 1999.
• 20: Daniel B. Horn , Lana Karasik , Judith S. Olsen, The effects of spatial and temporal video distortion on lie detection performance, CHI '02 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, April 20-25, 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA [doi>10.1145/506443.506561]
• 21: Kies, J. K., Williges, R. C., Rosson, M. B. Controlled Laboratory Experimentation and Field Study Evaluation of Video Conference for Distance Learning Applications (Rep. No. HCIL 96-02) Virginia Tech, 1996.
• 22: Barber, P. J. & Laws, J. V. Image Quality and Video Communication in R. Damper, W. Hall, & J. Richards (Eds.) Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia Technologies & their Future Applications, p. 163--78, London, UK: Pentech Press, 1994
• 23: ITU-R Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures. (Rep. No. BT.500-7), 2004.
• 24: Westheimer, G. Visual acuity, In W.M.Hart (Ed.), Adler's Physiology of the Eye: Clinical Application (9th ed., St. Louis, Mo: CV Mosby, 1992
• 25: Silbergleid, M. & Pescatore, M. The Guide To Digital Television (3rd ed.) Miller Freeman Psn Inc, 2000
• 26: Hands, D. S. A Basic Multimedia Quality Model IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 6 (6), p. 806--16, Dec. 2004.
• 27: Neumann, W. R., Crigler, A. N., Bove, V. M. Television Sound and Viewer Perceptions in Proc.Joint IEEE/Audio Eng.Soc.Meetings, p. 101--4, 1991
• 28: Beerends, J. G. & de Caluwe, F. E. The influence of video quality on perceived audio quality and vice versa Journal Audio Eng.Soc., 47, p. 355--62, 1999.
• 29: McCarthy, J., Miras, D., Knoche, H. TN01-1.1.03_UCL_MAESTRO_bandwidth_study_V02, 2004.
• 30: VQEG Final Report from the video quality experts group on the validation of objective models of video quality assessment (Rep. No. http://www.vqeg.org), 2000.
• 31: Södergård, C. Mobile television - technology and user experiences Report on the Mobile-TV project (Rep. No. P506) VTT Information Technology, 2003.
• 32: Odyssey software inc. CFCOM, http://www.odysseysoftware.com/. 2003
• 33: Wilson, G. & Sasse, M. A. Do Users Always Know What's Good For Them? Utilising Physiological Responses to Assess Media Quality. in S. McDonald, Y. Waern, & G. Cockton (Eds.) Proc.of HCI: People and Computers XIV, p. 327--39, 2000
• 34: Anna Bouch , Martina Angela Sasse, Why Value Is Everything: A User-Centered Approach to Internet Quality of Service and Pricing, Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Quality of Service, p.59-74, June 06-08, 2001
• 35: W3C-Recommendation, Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language SMIL 1.0 Specification., http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-smil-19980615. 1998

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.4 INFORMATION SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS
      H.4.3 Communications Applications

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.1 Multimedia Information Systems

General Terms:
Design, Economics, Experimentation, Human Factors, Measurement, Performance

Keywords:
acceptability, mobile TV, resolution, viewing distance