skip to main content
10.1145/3204949.3204962acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmsysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Artifacts Available

Film editing: new levers to improve VR streaming

Published:12 June 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Streaming Virtual Reality (VR), even under the mere form of 360° videos, is much more complex than for regular videos because to lower the required rates, the transmission decisions must take the user's head position into account. The way the user exploits her/his freedom is therefore crucial for the network load. In turn, the way the user moves depends on the video content itself. VR is however a whole new medium, for which the film-making language does not exist yet, its "grammar" only being invented. We present a strongly inter-disciplinary approach to improve the streaming of 360° videos: designing high-level content manipulations (film editing) to limit and even control the user's motion in order to consume less bandwidth while maintaining the user's experience. We build an MPEG DASH-SRD player for Android and the Samsung Gear VR, featuring FoV-based quality decision and a replacement strategy to allow the tiles' buffers to build up while keeping their state up-to-date with the current FoV as much as bandwidth allows. The editing strategies we design have been integrated within the player, and the streaming module has been extended to benefit from the editing. Two sets of user experiments enabled to show that editing indeed impacts head velocity (reduction of up to 30%), consumed bandwidth (reduction of up to 25%) and subjective assessment. User's attention driving tools from other communities can hence be designed in order to improve streaming. We believe this innovative work opens up the path to a whole new field of possibilities in defining degrees of freedom to be wielded for VR streaming optimization.

References

  1. 360fly. 2016. 360fly 4K User Guide.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. P. Rondao Alface, M. Aerts, D. Tytgat, S. Lievens, C. Stevens, N. Verzijp, and J.-F. Macq. 2017. 16K Cinematic VR Streaming. In ACM Multimedia Conf. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Android application. 2017. Within: Storytelling for Virtual Reality. https://with.in/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. B. Begole. 2016. Why The Internet Pipes Will Burst When Virtual Reality Takes Off. (Feb. 2016). Forbes.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. Bordwell and K. Thompson. 2006. Film Art: An Introduction. McGraw-Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Brillhart. 2016. VR and cinema, https://medium.com/@brillhart. (May. 2016). Google I/O conf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. C. Brown, G. Bhutra, M. Suhail, Q. Xu, and E. D. Ragan. 2017. Coordinating attention and cooperation in multi-user virtual reality narratives. In IEEE VR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Cisco. 2017. Cisco Visual Networking Index: Forecast and Methodology, 2016-2021. (June 2017). White paper.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. X. Corbillon, A. Devlic, G. Simon, and J. Chakareski. 2017. Optimal Set of 360-Degree Videos for Viewport-Adaptive Streaming. In ACM Multimedia Conf. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. X. Corbillon, G. Simon, A. Devlic, and J. Chakareski. 2017. Viewport-adaptive navigable 360-degree video delivery. In IEEE ICC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. International Data Corporation. 2018. Demand for Augmented Reality/Virtual Reality Headsets Expected to Rebound in 2018. (Mar. 2018). Industry report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. A. Coutrot and N. Guyader. 2017. Learning a time-dependent master saliency map from eye-tracking data in videos. CoRR abs/1702.00714 (2017). arXiv:1702.00714Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J.-E. Cutting, K.-L. Brunick, J.-E. DeLong, C. Iricinschi, and A. Candan. 2011. Quicker, faster, darker: Changes in Hollywood film over 75 years. i-Perception 2, 6 (2011), 569--576.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. S. Dambra, G. Samela, L. Sassatelli, R. Pighetti, R. Aparicio-Pardo, and A.-M. Pinna-Déry. 2018. TOUCAN-VR. Software ( 2018). https://github.com/UCA4SVR/TOUCAN-VRGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. S. Dambra, G. Samela, L. Sassatelli, R. Pighetti, R. Aparicio-Pardo, and A.-M. Pinna-Déry. 2018. TOUCAN-VR-data. Software ( 2018). https://github.com/UCA4SVR/TOUCAN_VR_dataGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. S. Dambra, G. Samela, L. Sassatelli, R. Pighetti, R. Aparicio-Pardo, and A.-M. Pinna-Déry. 2018. TOUCAN-VR-parametrizer. Software (2018). https://github.com/UCA4SVR/TOUCAN_VR_parametrizerGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. S. Dambra, G. Samela, L. Sassatelli, R. Pighetti, R. Aparicio-Pardo, and A.-M. Pinna-Déry. 2018. TOUCAN-VR-preprocessing. Software (2018). https://github.com/UCA4SVR/TOUCAN-preprocessingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. V. A. de Jesus Oliveira, L. Brayda, L. Nedel, and A. Maciel. 2017. Designing a Vibrotactile Head-Mounted Display for Spatial Awareness in 3D Spaces. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics 23, 4 (Apr. 2017), 1409--1417. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. T. El-Ganainy and M. Hefeeda. 2016. Streaming Virtual Reality Content. CoRR abs/1612.08350 (2016). arXiv:1612.08350Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Facebook. 2017. Enhancing high-resolution 360 streaming with view prediction. (Apr. 2017). Facebook Developers Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Facebook. 2017. The Evolution of Dynamic Streaming. (Apr. 2017). Facebook Developers Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Facebook. 2017. VR201: Lessons from the Frontlines. (Apr. 2017). Facebook Developers Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. C.-H. Fan, J. Lee, W.-C. Lo, C.-Y. Huang, K.-T. Chen, and C.-H. Hsu. 2017. Fixation Prediction for 360 Video Streaming in Head-Mounted Virtual Reality. In ACM NOSSDAV. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. FFmpeg. 2017. FFmpeg. https://www.ffmpeg.org/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. V. R. Gaddam, M. Riegler, R. Eg, C. Griwodz, and P. Halvorsen. 2016. Tiling in Interactive Panoramic Video: Approaches and Evaluation. IEEE Trans. on Multimedia 18, 9 (Sep. 2016), 1819--1831. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Google. 2017. Exoplayer. http://google.github.io/ExoPlayer/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. GPAC. 2017. MP4Box. https://gpac.wp.imt.fr/mp4box/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. GPAC. 2017. Osmo4. https://gpac.wp.imt.fr/player/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. M. Graf, C. Timmerer, and C. Mueller. 2017. Towards Bandwidth Efficient Adaptive Streaming of Omnidirectional Video over HTTP: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation. In ACM MMSyS. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Q. Huynh-Thu, M. Barkowsky, and P. Le Callet. 2011. The Importance of Visual Attention in Improving the 3D-TV Viewing Experience: Overview and New Perspectives. IEEE Trans. on Broadcasting 57, 2 (Jun. 2011), 421--431.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Hollywood lexicon. 2000. 30 Degree Rule. http://www.hollywoodlexicon.com/thirtydegree.html. (2000).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. D. Liman. 2016. Invisible. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6178894/. (2016). VR series, Samsung.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. O. Niamut, E. Thomas, L. D'Acunto, C. Concolato, F. Denoual, and S.-Y. Lim. 2016. MPEG DASH SRD: Spatial Relationship Description. In ACM MMSyS. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. G.W. Oehlert. 2010. A First Course in Design and Analysis of Experiments. Macmillian.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. J. Orlosky, K. Kiyokawa, and H. Takemura. 2017. Virtual and Augmented Reality on the 5G Highway. J. of Information Processing 25 (2017), 133--141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. S. Petrangeli, V. Swaminathan, M. Hosseini, and F. De Turck. 2017. An HTTP/2-Based Adaptive Streaming Framework for 360 Virtual Reality Videos. In ACM Multimedia Conf. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. S. Petrangeli, V. Swaminathan, M. Hosseini, and F. De Turck. 2017. Improving Virtual Reality Streaming Using HTTP/2. In ACM MMSyS. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. J.-T. Petty. 2016. Gone. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4876244/. (2016). VR series, Samsung.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. J. De Praeter, P. Duchi, G. Van Wallendael, J.-F. Macq, and P. Lambert. 2016. Efficient Encoding of Interactive Personalized Views Extracted from Immersive Video Content. In ACM Int. Workshop on Multimedia Alternate Realities. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. M. Reilhac. 2016. Presence Design and Spatial Writing in Virtual Reality. (Jun. 2016). Lecture at FilmCamp Norway.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. S. Saarinen, V. Makela, P. Kallioniemi, J. Hakulinen, and M. Turune. 2017. Guidelines for Designing Interactive Omnidirectional Video Applications. In IFIP TNTERACT. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Samsung. 2017. Samsung Gear VR Framework. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Preston Sturges. 1991. Preston Sturges by Preston Sturges: His Life in His Words. Touchstone.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. A. Taghavi Nasrabadi, A. Mahzari, J. D. Beshay, and R. Prakash. 2017. Adaptive 360-degree video streaming using layered video coding. In IEEE VR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. C. Milk (Within). 2016. The birth of virtual reality as an art form. (Jun. 2016). TED talk.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. M. Xiao, C. Zhou, Y. Liu, and S. Chen. 2017. OpTile: Toward Optimal Tiling in 360-degree Video Streaming. In ACM Multimedia Conf. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. C. Zhou, Z. Li, and Y. Liu. 2017. A Measurement Study of Oculus 360 Degree Video Streaming. In ACM NOSSDAV.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Film editing: new levers to improve VR streaming

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          MMSys '18: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference
          June 2018
          604 pages
          ISBN:9781450351928
          DOI:10.1145/3204949
          • General Chair:
          • Pablo Cesar,
          • Program Chairs:
          • Michael Zink,
          • Niall Murray

          Copyright © 2018 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 June 2018

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate176of530submissions,33%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader