Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Comparison of depth cues for relative depth judgments
Author(s): William F. Reinhart; Robert J. Beaton; Harry L. Snyder
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

This paper reports on two experiments in which subjects judged the relative depth ordering and subjective quality of depth of simple, geometric figures (planar circle, square, and triangle). The 3-D images were presented on a Tektronix SGS 620 field-sequential stereoscopic CRT. Four sources of depth information (cue types) were combined factorially to construct exemplary 3-D images: Relative Size (angular subtense decreased with increasing depth); Disparity (binocular disparity varied from crossed to uncrossed with increasing depth); Interposition (closer figures overlapped ones farther away in depth); and Luminance (luminance decreased with increasing depth). Inclusion of each of the three monocular cues produced significantly faster depth judgments. However, there was a lack of significant response time effects associated with binocular disparity. Conversely, stereo presentations strongly improved ratings of subjective image quality. These data indicate that stereoscopic images may provide subjectively more compelling depth information than images containing only monocular cues. However, they also provide evidence for at least one limitation of stereoscopic display utility.

Paper Details

Date Published: 1 September 1990
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 1256, Stereoscopic Displays and Applications, (1 September 1990); doi: 10.1117/12.19884
Show Author Affiliations
William F. Reinhart, Virginia Polytechnic Institute (United States)
Robert J. Beaton, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ. (United States)
Harry L. Snyder, Virginia Polytechnic Institute (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 1256:
Stereoscopic Displays and Applications
John O. Merritt; Scott S. Fisher, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top