Subject: [clue] Definitions for the two multi-view usages

From: Roni Even <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:03:50 +0200

Hi,

The use case draft has a multi-view use case. The term multi-view is not
clear since there are two main cases that use the term.

I will try to use two different terms that will enable us to differentiate
the cases and have the right requirements. My proposal is to use "Multipoint
Multiview" and "Stereoscopic Multiview" using the following definitions

1.       Multiview  as specified in section 3.7 of the use case draft.   The
definition will be "The multipoint multi-view conference extends the point
to point case by having each participant have his own "seat" in a virtual
meeting room. This means that each participant will see a different view
with a different participant to his left and right side. The participant
expect to see a picture that reflects the relative position of the person."

2.       Multiview as discussed in Multi View Coding(MVC) which is an
amendment to H.264 or in the boarder sense a stereoscopic view.  The
definition will be "Stereoscopic Multi-view provides two media captures of
the same object for creating or enhancing the illusion of depth in an image
by presenting two offset images separately to the left and right eye of the
viewer."

Roni Even

---

From: Stephen Botzko <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:10:22 -0400

I suggest describing the MVC case as "stereoscopic 3D".  There are several
ways of encoding 3D out there, including side by side and top/bottom merging
of images, 2D+depth, and H.264 MVC.  At this point we have no need to
distinguish them, though of course we will need to ensure that they can be
distinguished in the signaling.  That might not be CLUE's job anyway.

There is at least one other usage of multiview.  There are some "multiview
displays" that are capable of showing completely different images to the
multiple viewers in the room.  Some are also 3D, but not they do not have to
be.  This idea was used in the EU telepresence demonstration technology to
improve eye contact.  In that project, it was combined with both of Roni's
Multiviews (though it used 2D+depth, and not H.264 MVC).

I think we need a new name for multiview per the use case draft, so we can
keep these three usages distinct.  Not sure what it should be, though
perhaps it should use "camera" or even "capture", since it is really about
capturing the same field of view from multiple camera angles.

Regards
Stephen Botzko

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Roni Even <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi,****
> clear since there are two main cases that use the term.****
>
> the cases and have the right requirements. My proposal is to use “Multipoint
> Multiview” and “Stereoscopic Multiview” using the following definitions***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> **1.       **Multiview  as specified in section 3.7 of the use case
> draft.   The definition will be “ conference extends the point to point case
> by having each participant have his own “seat” in a virtual meeting room.
> This means that each participant will see a different view with a different
> participant to his left and right side. The participant expect to see a
> picture that reflects the relative position of the person.”****
>
> **2.       **Multiview as discussed in Multi View Coding(MVC) which is an
> definition will be “Stereoscopic Multi-view provides two media captures of
> the same object for creating or enhancing the illusion of depth in an
> image by presenting two offset images separately to the left and righ t eye
> of >****
>
> ** **
>
> Roni Even****
>
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>
>