Image Quality Assessment and Color Difference

An average healthy person does not perceive the world in just black and white. Moreover, the perceived world is not composed of pixels and through vision humans perceive structures. However, the acquisition and display systems discretize the world. Therefore, we need to consider pixels, structures and colors to model the quality of experience. Quality assessment methods use the pixel-wise and structural metrics whereas color science approaches use the patch-based color differences. In this work, we combine these approaches by extending CIEDE2000 formula with perceptual color difference to assess image quality. We examine how perceptual color difference-based metric (PCDM) performs compared to PSNR, CIEDE2000, SSIM, MS-SSIM and CW-SSIM on the LIVE database. In terms of linear correlation, PCDM obtains compatible results under white noise (97.9%), Jpeg (95.9%) and Jp2k (95.6%) with an overall correlation of 92.7%. We also show that PCDM captures color-based artifacts that can not be captured by structure-based metrics.Comment: Paper: 5 pages, 5 figures, 2 tables, and Presentation [Ancillary files

CSV: Image Quality Assessment Based on Color, Structure, and Visual System

This paper presents a full-reference image quality estimator based on color, structure, and visual system characteristics denoted as CSV. In contrast to the majority of existing methods, we quantify perceptual color degradations rather than absolute pixel-wise changes. We use the CIEDE2000 color difference formulation to quantify low-level color degradations and the Earth Mover's Distance between color name descriptors to measure significant color degradations. In addition to the perceptual color difference, CSV also contains structural and perceptual differences. Structural feature maps are obtained by mean subtraction and divisive normalization, and perceptual feature maps are obtained from contrast sensitivity formulations of retinal ganglion cells. The proposed quality estimator CSV is tested on the LIVE, the Multiply Distorted LIVE, and the TID 2013 databases, and it is always among the top two performing quality estimators in terms of at least ranking, monotonic behavior or linearity.Comment: 31 pages, 9 figures, 7 table