OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A


  • Vol. 7, Iss. 10 — Oct. 1, 1990
  • pp: 2024–2031

Evaluation of subjective image quality with the square-root integral method

Peter G. J. Barten  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA A, Vol. 7, Issue 10, pp. 2024-2031 (1990)

View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1041 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



After a short survey of some other metrics of perceived image quality, the square-root integral (SQRI) is described. In this metric a fixed mathematical expression for the contrast sensitivity of the eye is used. With the SQRI method the effect of various display parameters, such as resolution, addressability, contrast, luminance, display size, and viewing distance, on subjective image quality can be taken into account. Experimental data of subjective image quality, measured by various authors, are compared with calculated SQRI values. From the comparison it appears that the calculated SQRI values show a good linear correlation with perceived subjective image quality not only at variation of resolution but also at simultaneous variation of other display parameters.

© 1990 Optical Society of America

Original Manuscript: November 14, 1989
Manuscript Accepted: April 30, 1990
Published: October 1, 1990

Peter G. J. Barten, "Evaluation of subjective image quality with the square-root integral method," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 7, 2024-2031 (1990)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  


  1. E. M. Granger, K. N. Cupery, “An optical merit function (SQF), which correlates with subjective image judgments,” Photog. Sci. Eng. 16, 221–230 (1972).
  2. H. L. Snyder, “Modulation transfer function area as a measure of image quality,” presented at the Visual Search Symposium of the Committee on Vision, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1970.
  3. A. van Meeteren, “Visual aspects of image intensification,” Ph.D. dissertation (University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1973).
  4. G. C. Higgins, “Image quality criteria,” J. Appl. Photogr. Eng. 3, 53–60 (1977).
  5. H. L. Task, A. R. Pinkus, J. P. Hornseth, “A comparison of several television display image quality measures,” Proc. Soc. Inf. Displ. 19, 113–119 (1978).
  6. C. R. Carlson, R. W. Cohen, “A simple psycho-physical model for predicting the visibility of displayed information,” Proc. Soc. Inf. Displ. 21, 229–246 (1980).
  7. R. J. Beaton, “Quantitative models of image quality,” presented at the Human Factors Society 27th Annual Meeting, 1983.
  8. P. G. J. Barten, “The SQRI method: a new method for the evaluation of visible resolution on a display,” Proc. Soc. Inf. Displ. 28, 253–262 (1987).
  9. P. G. J. Barten, “Evaluation of CRT displays with the SQRI method,” Proc. Soc. Inf. Displ. 30, 9–14 (1989).
  10. P. G. J. Barten, “The effects of picture size and definition on perceived image quality,” IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev. 36, 1865–1869 (1989). [CrossRef]
  11. P. G. J. Barten, “The square root integral (SQRI): a new metric to describe the effect of various display parameters on perceived image quality,” in Human Vision, Visual Processing, and Digital Display, B. E. Rogowitz, ed., Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng.1077, 73–82 (1989). [CrossRef]
  12. C. R. Carlson, “Sine-wave threshold contrast-sensitivity function: dependence on display size,” RCA Rev. 43, 675–683 (1982).
  13. F. L. van Nes, “Experimental studies in spatiotemporal contrast transfer by the human eye,” Ph.D. dissertation (University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1968).
  14. J. H. D. M. Westerink, J. A. J. Roufs, “A local basis for perceptually relevant resolution measures,” Soc. Inf. Display Digest 19, 360–363 (1988).
  15. S. H. Baker, M. E. Carpenter, “Correlation of spot characteristics with perceived image quality,” IEEE Trans. Commun. Electron. 35, 319–324 (1989).
  16. E. van der Zee, M. H. W. A. Boesten, “The influence of luminance and size on the image quality of complex scenes,” in IPO Annual Progress Report (Institute for Perception Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 1980), pp. 69–75.
  17. J. H. D. M. Westerink, J. A. J. Roufs, “Subjective image quality as a function of viewing distance, resolution and picture size,” SMPTE J. 98, 113–119 (1989). [CrossRef]
  18. T. Hatada, H. Sakata, H. Kusaka, “Psychophysical analysis of the ‘sensation of reality’ induced by a visual wide-field display,” SMPTE J. 95, 560–569 (1980). [CrossRef]
  19. T. Mitsuhashi, “Scanning specifications and picture quality,” in “High-definition television,” NHK Tech. Monograph (Japan Broadcasting Corporation, Tokyo, 1982), pp. 21–32.
  20. L. C. Jesty, “The relation between picture size, viewing distance and picture quality,” Proc. Inst. Electr. Eng. Part B 105, 425–439 (1958).

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited