Visual discomfort is the adverse sensations, such as headaches and eyestrain, encountered on viewing certain stimuli. These sensations can arise under certain viewing conditions, such as stereoscopic viewing and prolonged reading of text patterns. Also, discomfort can occur as a result of viewing stimuli with certain spatial properties, including stripes and filtered noise patterns of particular spatial frequency. This thesis is an exploration of the stimulus properties causing discomfort, within the framework of two theoretical explanations. Both of the explanations relate to the stimuli being difficult for the visual system to process. The first is concerned with discomfort being the result of inefficient neural processing. Neural activity requires energy to process information, and stimuli that demand a lot of energy to be processed might be uncomfortable. The second explanation revolves around uncomfortable stimuli not being effective in driving the accommodative (focussing) response. Accommodation relies on the stimulus as a cue to drive the response effectively - an uninformative cue might result in discomfort from an uncertain accommodative response. The following research investigates both these possibilities using a combination of psychophysical experimentation, questionnaire-based surveys on non-clinical populations, and computational modelling. The implications of the work for clinical populations are also discussed.

The concept of "visual fatigue" has been studied for 70 years or more. In that time, no single metric of measuring visual fatigue nor one agreed-upon set of tasks to induce visual fatigue has been settled upon. Not even a robust definition of visual fatigue has been established. This research worked to solve some of those problems. This research first set out to develop an index of visual fatigue that could be used effectively in quantifying the subjective experience of visual fatigue. Then it sought to create a set of measurable tasks, representative of office work, that would induce visual fatigue. Taking these two developments, an experiment using human participants was conducted to validate these developments and work toward solving two issues in the visual fatigue field: how visual display technology and ambient illumination affect the onset of visual fatigue. A 4x4 within-subjects design was developed and executed to study how these two independent variables affected ratings of visual fatigue, performance on the task battery, subjective image quality judgments, and contrast sensitivity shifts. Two cathode ray tube (CRT) and two active-matrix LCD (AMLCD) monitors were used in this study. While many instances of the monitors as a whole caused significant differences in reports of visual fatigue, performance, subjective image quality, and contrast sensitivity loss, only a slight effect of display technology was found. Four of eleven visual fatigue and two of eight subjective image quality dimensions showed that the LCD monitors induced more visual fatigue and were rated poorer than the CRT monitors. Ambient illumination levels of 0, 300, 600, and 1200 lux affected all four groups of dependent variables. On the whole, lighting caused visual fatigue, with "watery eyes" and "glare from lights" being adversely affected by brighter lighting. The 0 and 1200 lux were associated with the worst performance, while 300 lux was associated with the best performance. Subjective image quality was affected by lighting, with increasing lighting causing bothersome screen reflections and more temporal (e.g., flicker and jitter) distortions; 600 lux induced more reports of image sizing anomalies. Finally, it caused significantly worse shifts at the 6.0 c/deg spatial frequency on the contrast sensitivity test. The data show that lighting of 300 lux is the best of these four illumination levels. The results of this study not only contribute to the body of research in the areas of display technology and ambient illumination, but several developments of this research are offered to the research community: a complete survey metric of visual fatigue, a standardized battery of tasks for studying visual fatigue and image quality, and a comprehensive subjective image quality survey. / Ph. D.

The ever increasing popularity and enormous growth in 3D movie industry is the stimulating phenomenon for the penetration of 3D services into home entertainment systems. Providing a third dimension gives intense visual experience to the viewers. Being a new eld, there are several researches going on to measure the end user's viewing experience. Research groups including 3D TV manufacturers, service providers and standards organizations are interested to improve user experience. Recent research in 3D video quality measurements have revealed uncertain issues as well as more well known results. Measuring the perceptual stereoscopic video quality by subjective testing can provide practical results. This thesis studies and investigate three di erent rating scales (Video Quality, Visual Discomfort and Sense of Presence) and compares them by subjective testing, combined with two viewing distances at 3H and 5H, where H is the hight of display screen. This thesis work shows that single rating scale produces the same result as three di erent scales and viewing distance has very less or no impact on Quality of Experience (QoE) of 3DTV for 3H and 5H distances for symmetric coding impairments. / indirajithv@gmail.com

3D stereoscopic technology intensifies and heightens the viewer s experience by adding an extra dimension to the viewing of visual content. However, with expansion of this technology to the commercial market concerns have been expressed about the potential negative effects on the visual system, producing viewer discomfort. The visual stimulus provided by a 3D stereoscopic display differs from that of the real world, and so it is important to understand whether these differences may pose a health hazard. The aim of this thesis is to investigate the effect of 3D stereoscopic stimulation on visual discomfort. To that end, four experimental studies were conducted. In the first study two hypotheses were tested. The first hypothesis was that the viewing of 3D stereoscopic stimuli, which are located geometrically beyond the screen on which the images are displayed, would induce adaptation changes in the resting position of the eyes (exophoric heterophoria changes). The second hypothesis was that participants whose heterophoria changed as a consequence of adaptation during the viewing of the stereoscopic stimuli would experience less visual discomfort than those people whose heterophoria did not adapt. In the experiment an increase of visual discomfort change in the 3D condition in comparison with the 2D condition was found. Also, there were statistically significant changes in heterophoria under 3D conditions as compared with 2D conditions. However, there was appreciable variability in the magnitude of this adaptation among individuals, and no correlation between the amount of heterophoria change and visual discomfort change was observed. In the second experiment the two hypotheses tested were based on the vergence-accommodation mismatch theory, and the visual-vestibular mismatch theory. The vergence-accommodation mismatch theory predicts that a greater mismatch between the stimuli to accommodation and to vergence would produce greater symptoms in visual discomfort when viewing in 3D conditions than when viewing in 2D conditions. An increase of visual discomfort change in the 3D condition in comparison with the 2D condition was indeed found; however the magnitude of visual discomfort reported did not correlate with the mismatch present during the watching of 3D stereoscopic stimuli. The visual-vestibular mismatch theory predicts that viewing a stimulus stereoscopically will produce a greater sense of vection than viewing it in 2D. This will increase the conflict between the signals from the visual and vestibular systems, producing greater VIMS (Visually- Induced Motion Sickness) symptoms. Participants did indeed report an increase in motion sickness symptoms in the 3D condition. Furthermore, participants with closer seating positions reported more VIMS than participants sitting farther away whilst viewing 3D stimuli. This suggests that the amount of visual field stimulated during 3D presentation affects VIMS, and is an important factor in terms of viewing comfort. In the study more younger viewers (21 to 39 years old) than older viewers (40 years old and older) reported a greater change in visual discomfort during the 3D condition than the 2D condition. This suggests that the visual system s response to a stimulus, rather than the stimulus itself, is a reason for discomfort. No influence of gender on viewing comfort was found. In the next experiment participants fusion capability, as measured by their fusional reserves, was examined to determine whether this component has an impact on reported discomfort during the watching of movies in the 3D condition versus the 2D condition. It was hypothesised that participants with limited fusional range would experience more visual discomfort than participants with a wide fusion range. The hypothesis was confirmed but only in the case of convergent and not divergent eye movement. This observation illustrates that participants capability to convergence has a significant impact on visual comfort. The aim of the last experiment was to examine responses of the accommodation system to changes in 3D stimulus position and to determine whether discrepancies in these responses (i.e. accommodation overshoot, accommodation undershoot) could account for visual discomfort experienced during 3D stereoscopic viewing. It was found that accommodation discrepancy was larger for perceived forwards movement than for perceived backwards movement. The discrepancy was slightly higher in the group susceptible to visual discomfort than in the group not susceptible to visual discomfort, but this difference was not statistically significant. When considering the research findings as a whole it was apparent that not all participants experienced more discomfort whilst watching 3D stereoscopic stimuli than whilst watching 2D stimuli. More visual discomfort in the 3D condition than in the 2D condition was reported by 35% of the participants, whilst 24% of the participants reported more headaches and 17% of the participants reported more VIMS. The research indicates that multiple causative factors have an impact on reported symptoms. The analysis of the data suggests that discomfort experienced by people during 3D stereoscopic stimulation may reveal binocular vision problems. This observation suggests that 3D technology could be used as a screening method to diagnose un-treated binocular vision disorder. Additionally, this work shows that 3D stereoscopic technology can be easily adopted to binocular vision measurement. The conclusion of this thesis is that many people do not suffer adverse symptoms when viewing 3D stereoscopic displays, but that if adverse symptoms are present they can be caused either by the conflict in the stimulus, or by the heightened experience of self-motion which leads to Visually-Induced Motion Sickness (VIMS).