skip to main content
10.1145/3240508.3240705acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

MiniView Layout for Bandwidth-Efficient 360-Degree Video

Published:15 October 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

With the recent increase in popularity of VR devices, 360-degree video has become increasingly popular. As more users experience this new medium, it will likely see further increases in popularity as users experience its greater immersiveness compared to traditional video streams. 360-degree video streams must encode the omnidirectional view, and, with current encoding techniques, these views require significantly higher bandwidth than traditional video streams. These larger bandwidth requirements comprise the main barrier toward wider adoption by video streaming services.

To reduce bandwidth requirements of 360-degree streaming, we propose the MiniView Layout. Compared to the standard cube layout, with equal pixel densities, 360-degree videos encoded in the MiniView Layout can save 16% of the encoded video size while delivering similar visual qualities. In conjunction with the MiniView Layout, we make the following contributions toward improving the 360-degree video ecosystem: i) We create a "projection efficiency" metric that quantifies the efficiencies of sphere-to-2D projections. ii) We introduce the ffmpeg360 tool. ffmpeg360 transcodes 360-degree videos and measures comparative 360-degree video quality given user head movement traces. The tool performs these tasks efficiently, using OpenGL for GPU acceleration.

References

  1. Bringing pixels front and center in VR video. https://blog.google/products/google-vr/bringing-pixels-front-and-center-vr-video/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Cubic Projection. http://wiki.panotools.org/Cubic_Projection.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. End-to-end optimizations for dynamic streaming. https://code.facebook.com/posts/637561796428084/end-to-end-optimizations-for-dynamic-streaming/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Equirectangular Projection. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/EquirectangularProjection.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. FFmpeg. http://www.ffmpeg.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. OpenGL. https://www.opengl.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Rectilinear Projection. https://wiki.panotools.org/Rectilinear_Projection.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Yanan Bao, Huasen Wu, Tianxiao Zhang, Albara Ah Ramli, and Xin Liu. Shooting a moving target: Motion-prediction-based transmission for 360-degree videos. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), pages 1161--1170, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Xavier Corbillon, Francesca De Simone, and Gwendal Simon. 360-degree video head movement dataset. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference, pages 199--204. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Xavier Corbillon, Alisa Devlic, Gwendal Simon, and Jacob Chakareski. Optimal set of 360-degree videos for viewport-adaptive streaming. in Proc. of ACM Multimedia (MM), 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Xavier Corbillon, Gwendal Simon, Alisa Devlic, and Jacob Chakareski. Viewport-adaptive navigable 360-degree video delivery. In Communications (ICC), 2017 IEEE International Conference on, pages 1--7. IEEE, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Thomas H Cormen, Charles E Leiserson, Ronald L Rivest, and Clifford Stein. Introduction to Algorithms. The MIT Press, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Ching-Ling Fan, Jean Lee, Wen-Chih Lo, Chun-Ying Huang, Kuan-Ta Chen, and Cheng-Hsin Hsu. Fixation prediction for 360 video streaming in head-mounted virtualreality. In Proceedings of the 27th Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video, pages 67--72. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Mario Graf, Christian Timmerer, and Christopher Mueller. Towards bandwidth efficient adaptive streaming of omnidirectionalvideo over http: Design, implementation, and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference, pages 261--271. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Stefano Petrangeli, Viswanathan Swaminathan, Mohammad Hosseini, and Filip De Turck. An http/2-based adaptive streaming framework for 360 virtual reality videos. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Multimedia Conference, pages 306--314. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Feng Qian, Lusheng Ji, Bo Han, and Vijay Gopalakrishnan. Optimizing 360 video delivery over cellular networks. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on All Things Cellular: Operations, Applications and Challenges, pages 1--6. ACM, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Liyang Sun, Fanyi Duanmu, Yong Liu, Yao Wang, Yinghua Ye, Hang Shi, and DavidDai. Multi-path multi-tier 360-degree video streaming in 5g networks. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference, pages 162--173. ACM, 2018. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Zhou Wang, Alan C Bovik, Hamid R Sheikh, and Eero P Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. Image Processing, IEEE Transactions on, 13(4):600--612, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Chenglei Wu, Zhihao Tan, Zhi Wang, and Shiqiang Yang. A dataset for exploring user behaviors in vr spherical videostreaming. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference, pages 193--198. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Mengbai Xiao, Chao Zhou, Yao Liu, and Songqing Chen. Optile: Toward optimal tiling in 360-degree video streaming. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Multimedia Conference, pages 708--716. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Lan Xie, Zhimin Xu, Yixuan Ban, Xinggong Zhang, and Zongming Guo. 360probdash: Improving qoe of 360 video streaming using tile-based http adaptive streaming. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Multimedia Conference, pages 315--323. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Alireza Zare, Alireza Aminlou, Miska M Hannuksela, and Moncef Gabbouj. Hevc-compliant tile-based streaming of panoramic video for virtual reality applications. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Multimedia Conference, pages 601--605. ACM, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Chao Zhou, Zhenhua Li, and Yao Liu. A Measurement Study of Oculus 360 Degree Video Streaming. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Multimedia Systems. ACM, 2017. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. MiniView Layout for Bandwidth-Efficient 360-Degree Video

    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
      MM '18: Proceedings of the 26th ACM international conference on Multimedia
      October 2018
      2167 pages
      ISBN:9781450356657
      DOI:10.1145/3240508

      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 the author(s) 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: 15 October 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      MM '18 Paper Acceptance Rate209of757submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate995of4,171submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      MM '24
      MM '24: The 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia
      October 28 - November 1, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader