(46-6) 11 * << * >> * Russian * English * Content * All Issues

Comparison of discrete cosine and wavelet transforms in RAW image compression systems
S.V. Sai 1, A.V. Zinkevich 1, E.S. Fomina 1

1 Pacific National University, Khabarovsk, Russia

 PDF, 1148 kB

DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-1094

Pages: 929-938.

Full text of article: Russian language.

Abstract:
The article describes features of digital processing of image signals in the process of coding based on discrete cosine (DCT) and wavelet transforms (DWT) that are used in the JPEG and JPEG2000 compression standards. To compare DCT and DWT, a digital model of the system has been developed that implements the same stages of signal processing, except for the stages of the proper discrete transforms. A method for analyzing the efficiency of the transformations based on objective assessments of image quality depending on the compression ratio is proposed. The peculiarities include the fact that, in contrast to the popular PSNR and SSIM metrics, it is proposed that the quality be assessed using the reduction factor for the RAW image format, the calculation of which is associated with the contrast sensitivity of vision. As a result of the research, quantitative estimates of the compression efficiency are obtained for the given quality parameters, depending on the type of conversion and the detail of the RAW images. Recommendations are made regarding the development of methods for increasing the efficiency of image compression based on DWT or DCT.

Keywords:
image analysis, distortion metric, discrete cosine transform, discrete wavelet transform, compression efficiency.

Citation:
Sai SV, Zinkeviсh AV, Fomina ES. Comparison of discrete cosine and wavelet transforms in RAW image compression systems. Computer Optics 2022; 46(6): 929-938. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-1094.

Acknowledgements:
This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Project No. 22-21-00394) "Development of neural network methods for improving the quality of digital image transmission in intelligent video systems".

References:
  1. Digital camera sensors. Source: <https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-sensors.htm>.
  2. Pennebaker WB, Mitchel JL. JPEG still image data compression standard. New York, USA: Springer; 1992.
  3. Drozdov SN, Zhiglaty AA, Kravchenko PP, Lutai VN, Skorokhod SN, Khusainov NS. JPEG2000 standard: basic algorithms, implementation examples, and application prospects [In Russian]. Rostov-on-Don: Publishing House of SFU; 2014.
  4. Taubman D, Marcellin MD. JPEG2000: Image compression fundamentals, standard and practice. Kluver Academic Publishers; 2002.
  5. Kapustin VV, Kamenskiy AV. Estimation of intra-frame compression quality of a high-resolution image for JPEG and JPEG2000 Standards. Proceedings of TUSUR University 2016; 19(3): 27-31.
  6. Elamaran E, Praveen P. Comparison of DCT and wavelets in image coding. 2012 Int Conf on Computer Communication and Informatics 2012: 1-4.
  7. Jain K, Agrawal V. A image comparative study using DCT, fast Fourier, wavelet transforms and Huffman algorithm. Int J Eng Res Generic Sci 2015; 3(4): 594-599.
  8. Jeengar V, Omkar S, Singh A, Yadav M, Keshri S. A review comparison of wavelet and cosine image transforms. Int J Image Graph Signal Process 2012; 11: 16-25.
  9. Xiong Z, Ramchandran K, Orchard M, Zhang Y-Q. A comparative study of DCT- and wavelet-based image coding. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 1999; 9(5): 692-695.
  10. Mehala R. Comparison of DCT and DWT in image compression techniques. Int J Adv Res Trends Eng Technol 2016; 3(20): 291-295.
  11. Wang Z, Bovik AC, Sheikh HR, Simoncelli EP. Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process 2004; 13(4): 600-612.
  12. Sony Alpha ILCE-A6000 Gallery. Source: <https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/sony/reviews/>.
  13. Fairchild MD. Color appearance models. John Wiley and Sons; 2005.
  14. Bzip2 and libbzip2. Source: <http://bzip2.org/>.
  15. Balster EJ, Fortener BT, Turri WF. Post-compression rate-distortion development for embedded block coding with optimal truncation in JPEG2000 imagery. Int J Image Graph 2011; 11(4): 611-627.
  16. Lin W, Kuo C-CJ. Perceptual visual quality metrics: A survey. J Vis Commun Image Represent 2011; 22(4): 297-312.
  17. ISO 12233:2017 Photography – Electronic still picture imaging – Resolution and spatial frequency responses. Source: <https://www.iso.org/standard /71696.html>.
  18. Imatest. Source: <https://www.imatest.com/>.
  19. High resolution test patterns. Source: <http://www.bealecorner.org/red/test-patterns/>.
  20. Sai SV. A method for assessing photorealistic image quality with high resolution. Computer Optics 2022; 46(1): 121-129. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-899.
  21. Sai SV. Metric of fine structures distortions of compressed images. Computer Optics 2018; 42(5): 829-837. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-2018-42-5-829-837.
  22. Svoboda P, Hradis M, Barina D, Zemcik P. Compression artifacts removal using convolutional neural networks. 2016. arXiv Preprint. Source: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.00366>.
  23. Wang Z, Chen J, Steven CHH. Deep learning for image super-resolution: A survey. 2020. arXiv Preprint. Source: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.06068>.

© 2009, IPSI RAS
151, Molodogvardeiskaya str., Samara, 443001, Russia; E-mail: journal@computeroptics.ru ; Tel: +7 (846) 242-41-24 (Executive secretary), +7 (846) 332-56-22 (Issuing editor), Fax: +7 (846) 332-56-20