Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
TEAM MEMBERS: Ch.V.Krishna Mohan B.Sravani B.J.V.P.Gowtham Kumar K.Sindhura G.Anudeep Varma
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT Lossless and Lossy Compression Overview of JPEG Lossy Compression Comparison between JPEG and JPEG 2000
ABSTRACT
In general quality metrics compare the original image to a distorted
diversity of channel capacities and display devices, the viewing distance and the spatiotemporal resolution of the displayed signal may be adapted in order to optimize the perceived signal quality.
For example, at low bit rate coding applications an observer may prefer
to reduce the resolution or increase the viewing distance to reduce the visibility of the compression artifacts.
compression artifacts requires new approaches for the evaluation of image quality that account for both image distortions and image size.
In order to better understand such tradeoffs, we conducted subjective tests
using two representative still image coders, JPEG and JPEG 2000.
Our results indicate that an observer would indeed prefer a lower spatial
resolution (at a fixed viewing distance) in order to reduce the visibility of the compression artifacts, but not all the way to the point where the artifacts are completely invisible.
reconstructed exactly the same as the original Applications: Medical imagery, Archiving
Lossy compression
Information loss is tolerable Many-to-1 mapping in compression eg. quantization Applications: commercial distribution (DVD) and rate
constrained environment where lossless methods can not provide enough compression ratio
Why Lossy?
o
Transform basics
Unitary transform
Quantization basics
Uniform Quantization
JPEG=T+Q+C
T: DCT, Q: Uniform Quantization, C: Run-length and
Huffman coding
Flow-chart diagram of DCT-based coding algorithm specified by Joint Photographic Expert Group (JPEG)
Original
JPEG 27:1
JPEG2000 27:1
JPEG
27:1 reduction =77,673 bits
JPEG
JPEG is a lossy compression technique used
for full-color or gray-scale images, by exploiting the fact that the human eye will not notice small color changes.
JPEG 2000 is an initiative that will provide an
image coding system using compression techniques based on the use of wavelet technology.
lossless compression in the same file stream. while JPEG usually only utilizes lossy compression. The JPEG 2000 files can also handle up to 256 channels of information as compared to the current JPEG standard. Another advantage of JPEG 2000 over JPEG is that JPEG 2000 is able to offer higher compression ratios for lossy compression. For lossy compression, data has shown that JPEG 2000 can typically compress images from 20%-200% more than JPEG
Compression efficiency for lossy compression is typically measured using the peak signal to noise ratio, or PSNR, and the root mean square error (RMSE)
Table: Comparison of PSNR compression efficiencies (in dB) for two images at various bit rates
OUTPUT
INPUT IMAGE
JPEG COMPRESSED IMAGE RESOLUTION MODIFIED IMAGE
REFERENCES
[1] T. N. Pappas, R. J. Safranek, and J. Chen, .Perceptual criteria for image quality evaluation,. in Handbook of Image and Video Processing, 2nd ed., A. C. Bovik, Ed. Academic Press, 2005, pp. 939.959. [2] J. H. D. M. Westerink and J. A. J. Roufs, .Subjective image quality as a function of viewing distance, resolution, and picture size,. SMPTE Journal, vol. 98, pp. 113.119, Feb. 1989.
[4] .The effects of picture size and definition on perceived image quality,. in IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 36, 9, Sept. 1989, pp. 1865.1869. [5] Subjective image quality of highdefinition television images,. in Proc. Society for Information Display, vol. 31, 1990, pp. 239.243. [6] C. Kuhmunch, G. Kuhne, C. Schremmer, and T. Haenselmann, .A video-scaling algorithm based on human perception for spatio-temporal stimuli,. in Multimedia Computing and Networking, W. chi Feng and M. G. Kienzle, Eds., Proc. SPIE, Vol. 4312, San Jose, CA, Jan. 2001, pp. 13.24.
[3] P. G. J. Barten, .The SQRI method: A new method for the evaluation of visible resolution on a display,. in Proc. Society for Information Display, vol. 28, 1987, pp. 253.262.
CONCLUSION
This paper has highlighted the need for a fundamental
change in our understanding of image quality assessment, both subjective and objective. The results of our subjective tests are expected to be applicable in the development of image fidelity measures that predict image quality over multiple resolutions and viewing conditions, and take into account both the visibility of the compression artifacts and the image size, i.e., the visibility of the signal itself. Such measures will be invaluable for scalable image and video compression applications.