Handheld threat object identification performance of 2-D visible imagery versus 3-D visible imagery

Keith Krapels, Ronald G. Driggers, Brian Teaney, Michelle Tomkinson, Steven K. Moyer

Research output: Contribution to journalConference articlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


The objective of this research was to determine if there was an improvement in human observer performance, identifying potential weapons or threat objects, when imagery is presented in three dimensions instead of two dimensions. Also it was desired to quantify this potential improvement in performance by evaluating the change in N 50 cycle criteria, for this task and target set. The advent of affordable, practical and real-time 3-D displays has led to a desire to evaluate and quantify the performance trade space for this potential application of the technology. The imagery was collected using a dual camera stereo imaging system. A series of eight different resolutions were presented to observers in both two and three dimensional formats. The set of targets consisted of twelve hand held objects. The objects were a mix of potential threats or weapons and possible confusers. Two such objects, for example, are a cellular telephone and a hand grenade. This target set was the same target set used in previously reported research which determined the N 50 requirements for handheld objects for both visible and infrared imagers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number06
Pages (from-to)1-15
Number of pages15
JournalProceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
StatePublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes
EventInfrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing XVI - Orlando, FL, United States
Duration: Mar 30 2005Apr 1 2005

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Applied Mathematics
  • Electrical and Electronic Engineering


Dive into the research topics of 'Handheld threat object identification performance of 2-D visible imagery versus 3-D visible imagery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this