Quality and Rate Control of Jpeg Xr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Microsoft Office Open XML Formats New File Formats for “Office 12”
The Microsoft Office Open XML Formats New File Formats for “Office 12” White Paper Published: June 2005 For the latest information, please see http://www.microsoft.com/office/wave12 Contents Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1 From .doc to .docx: a brief history of the Office file formats.................................................1 Benefits of the Microsoft Office Open XML Formats ................................................................2 Integration with Business Data .............................................................................................2 Openness and Transparency ...............................................................................................4 Robustness...........................................................................................................................7 Description of the Microsoft Office Open XML Format .............................................................9 Document Parts....................................................................................................................9 Microsoft Office Open XML Format specifications ...............................................................9 Compatibility with new file formats........................................................................................9 For more information ..............................................................................................................10 -
Exploring the .BMP File Format
Exploring the .BMP File Format Don Lancaster Synergetics, Box 809, Thatcher, AZ 85552 copyright c2003 as GuruGram #14 http://www.tinaja.com [email protected] (928) 428-4073 The .BMP image standard is used by Windows and elsewhere to represent graphics images in any of several different display and compression options. The .BMP advantages are that each pixel is usually independently available for any alteration or modification. And that repeated use does not normally degrade the image. Because lossy compression is not used. Its main disadvantage is that file sizes are usually horrendous compared to JPEG, fractal, GIF, or other lossy compression schemes. A comparison of popular image standards can be found here. I’ve long been using the .BMP format for my eBay and my other phototography, scanning, and post processing. I firmly believe that… All photography, scanning, and all image post-processing should always be done using .BMP or a similar non-lossy format. Only after all post-processing is complete should JPEG or another compressed distribution format be chosen. Some current examples of my .BMP work now do include the IMAGIMAG.PDF post-processing tutorial, the Bitmap Typewriterthat generates fully anti-aliased small fonts, the Aerial Photo Combiner, and similar utilities and tutorials found on our Fonts & Images, PostScript, and on our Acrobat library pages. A few projects of current interest involving .BMP files include true view camera swings and tilts for a digital camera, distortion correction, dodging & burning, preventing white punchthrough on knockouts, and emphasis vignetting. Mainly applied to uncompressed RGBX 24-bit color .BMP files. -
Why ODF?” - the Importance of Opendocument Format for Governments
“Why ODF?” - The Importance of OpenDocument Format for Governments Documents are the life blood of modern governments and their citizens. Governments use documents to capture knowledge, store critical information, coordinate activities, measure results, and communicate across departments and with businesses and citizens. Increasingly documents are moving from paper to electronic form. To adapt to ever-changing technology and business processes, governments need assurance that they can access, retrieve and use critical records, now and in the future. OpenDocument Format (ODF) addresses these issues by standardizing file formats to give governments true control over their documents. Governments using applications that support ODF gain increased efficiencies, more flexibility and greater technology choice, leading to enhanced capability to communicate with and serve the public. ODF is the ISO Approved International Open Standard for File Formats ODF is the only open standard for office applications, and it is completely vendor neutral. Developed through a transparent, multi-vendor/multi-stakeholder process at OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards), it is an open, XML- based document file format for displaying, storing and editing office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, and presentations. It is available for implementation and use free from any licensing, royalty payments, or other restrictions. In May 2006, it was approved unanimously as an International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard. Governments and Businesses are Embracing ODF The promotion and usage of ODF is growing rapidly, demonstrating the global need for control and choice in document applications. For example, many enlightened governments across the globe are making policy decisions to move to ODF. -
MPEG-21 Overview
MPEG-21 Overview Xin Wang Dept. Computer Science, University of Southern California Workshop on New Multimedia Technologies and Applications, Xi’An, China October 31, 2009 Agenda ● What is MPEG-21 ● MPEG-21 Standards ● Benefits ● An Example Page 2 Workshop on New Multimedia Technologies and Applications, Oct. 2009, Xin Wang MPEG Standards ● MPEG develops standards for digital representation of audio and visual information ● So far ● MPEG-1: low resolution video/stereo audio ● E.g., Video CD (VCD) and Personal music use (MP3) ● MPEG-2: digital television/multichannel audio ● E.g., Digital recording (DVD) ● MPEG-4: generic video and audio coding ● E.g., MP4, AVC (H.24) ● MPEG-7 : visual, audio and multimedia descriptors MPEG-21: multimedia framework ● MPEG-A: multimedia application format ● MPEG-B, -C, -D: systems, video and audio standards ● MPEG-M: Multimedia Extensible Middleware ● ● MPEG-V: virtual worlds MPEG-U: UI ● (29116): Supplemental Media Technologies ● ● (Much) more to come … Page 3 Workshop on New Multimedia Technologies and Applications, Oct. 2009, Xin Wang What is MPEG-21? ● An open framework for multimedia delivery and consumption ● History: conceived in 1999, first few parts ready early 2002, most parts done by now, some amendment and profiling works ongoing ● Purpose: enable all-electronic creation, trade, delivery, and consumption of digital multimedia content ● Goals: ● “Transparent” usage ● Interoperable systems ● Provides normative methods for: ● Content identification and description Rights management and protection ● Adaptation of content ● Processing on and for the various elements of the content ● ● Evaluation methods for determining the appropriateness of possible persistent association of information ● etc. Page 4 Workshop on New Multimedia Technologies and Applications, Oct. -
Free Lossless Image Format
FREE LOSSLESS IMAGE FORMAT Jon Sneyers and Pieter Wuille [email protected] [email protected] Cloudinary Blockstream ICIP 2016, September 26th DON’T WE HAVE ENOUGH IMAGE FORMATS ALREADY? • JPEG, PNG, GIF, WebP, JPEG 2000, JPEG XR, JPEG-LS, JBIG(2), APNG, MNG, BPG, TIFF, BMP, TGA, PCX, PBM/PGM/PPM, PAM, … • Obligatory XKCD comic: YES, BUT… • There are many kinds of images: photographs, medical images, diagrams, plots, maps, line art, paintings, comics, logos, game graphics, textures, rendered scenes, scanned documents, screenshots, … EVERYTHING SUCKS AT SOMETHING • None of the existing formats works well on all kinds of images. • JPEG / JP2 / JXR is great for photographs, but… • PNG / GIF is great for line art, but… • WebP: basically two totally different formats • Lossy WebP: somewhat better than (moz)JPEG • Lossless WebP: somewhat better than PNG • They are both .webp, but you still have to pick the format GOAL: ONE FORMAT THAT COMPRESSES ALL IMAGES WELL EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS Corpus Lossless formats JPEG* (bit depth) FLIF FLIF* WebP BPG PNG PNG* JP2* JXR JLS 100% 90% interlaced PNGs, we used OptiPNG [21]. For BPG we used [4] 8 1.002 1.000 1.234 1.318 1.480 2.108 1.253 1.676 1.242 1.054 0.302 the options -m 9 -e jctvc; for WebP we used -m 6 -q [4] 16 1.017 1.000 / / 1.414 1.502 1.012 2.011 1.111 / / 100. For the other formats we used default lossless options. [5] 8 1.032 1.000 1.099 1.163 1.429 1.664 1.097 1.248 1.500 1.017 0.302� [6] 8 1.003 1.000 1.040 1.081 1.282 1.441 1.074 1.168 1.225 0.980 0.263 Figure 4 shows the results; see [22] for more details. -
What Resolution Should Your Images Be?
What Resolution Should Your Images Be? The best way to determine the optimum resolution is to think about the final use of your images. For publication you’ll need the highest resolution, for desktop printing lower, and for web or classroom use, lower still. The following table is a general guide; detailed explanations follow. Use Pixel Size Resolution Preferred Approx. File File Format Size Projected in class About 1024 pixels wide 102 DPI JPEG 300–600 K for a horizontal image; or 768 pixels high for a vertical one Web site About 400–600 pixels 72 DPI JPEG 20–200 K wide for a large image; 100–200 for a thumbnail image Printed in a book Multiply intended print 300 DPI EPS or TIFF 6–10 MB or art magazine size by resolution; e.g. an image to be printed as 6” W x 4” H would be 1800 x 1200 pixels. Printed on a Multiply intended print 200 DPI EPS or TIFF 2-3 MB laserwriter size by resolution; e.g. an image to be printed as 6” W x 4” H would be 1200 x 800 pixels. Digital Camera Photos Digital cameras have a range of preset resolutions which vary from camera to camera. Designation Resolution Max. Image size at Printable size on 300 DPI a color printer 4 Megapixels 2272 x 1704 pixels 7.5” x 5.7” 12” x 9” 3 Megapixels 2048 x 1536 pixels 6.8” x 5” 11” x 8.5” 2 Megapixels 1600 x 1200 pixels 5.3” x 4” 6” x 4” 1 Megapixel 1024 x 768 pixels 3.5” x 2.5” 5” x 3 If you can, you generally want to shoot larger than you need, then sharpen the image and reduce its size in Photoshop. -
Versatile Video Coding – the Next-Generation Video Standard of the Joint Video Experts Team
31.07.2018 Versatile Video Coding – The Next-Generation Video Standard of the Joint Video Experts Team Mile High Video Workshop, Denver July 31, 2018 Gary J. Sullivan, JVET co-chair Acknowledgement: Presentation prepared with Jens-Rainer Ohm and Mathias Wien, Institute of Communication Engineering, RWTH Aachen University 1. Introduction Versatile Video Coding – The Next-Generation Video Standard of the Joint Video Experts Team 1 31.07.2018 Video coding standardization organisations • ISO/IEC MPEG = “Moving Picture Experts Group” (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11 = International Standardization Organization and International Electrotechnical Commission, Joint Technical Committee 1, Subcommittee 29, Working Group 11) • ITU-T VCEG = “Video Coding Experts Group” (ITU-T SG16/Q6 = International Telecommunications Union – Telecommunications Standardization Sector (ITU-T, a United Nations Organization, formerly CCITT), Study Group 16, Working Party 3, Question 6) • JVT = “Joint Video Team” collaborative team of MPEG & VCEG, responsible for developing AVC (discontinued in 2009) • JCT-VC = “Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding” team of MPEG & VCEG , responsible for developing HEVC (established January 2010) • JVET = “Joint Video Experts Team” responsible for developing VVC (established Oct. 2015) – previously called “Joint Video Exploration Team” 3 Versatile Video Coding – The Next-Generation Video Standard of the Joint Video Experts Team Gary Sullivan | Jens-Rainer Ohm | Mathias Wien | July 31, 2018 History of international video coding standardization -
2018-07-11 and for Information to the Iso Member Bodies and to the Tmb Members
Sergio Mujica Secretary-General TO THE CHAIRS AND SECRETARIES OF ISO COMMITTEES 2018-07-11 AND FOR INFORMATION TO THE ISO MEMBER BODIES AND TO THE TMB MEMBERS ISO/IEC/ITU coordination – New work items Dear Sir or Madam, Please find attached the lists of IEC, ITU and ISO new work items issued in June 2018. If you wish more information about IEC technical committees and subcommittees, please access: http://www.iec.ch/. Click on the last option to the right: Advanced Search and then click on: Documents / Projects / Work Programme. In case of need, a copy of an actual IEC new work item may be obtained by contacting [email protected]. Please note for your information that in the annexed table from IEC the "document reference" 22F/188/NP means a new work item from IEC Committee 22, Subcommittee F. If you wish to look at the ISO new work items, please access: http://isotc.iso.org/pp/. On the ISO Project Portal you can find all information about the ISO projects, by committee, document number or project ID, or choose the option "Stages search" and select "Search" to obtain the annexed list of ISO new work items. Yours sincerely, Sergio Mujica Secretary-General Enclosures ISO New work items 1 of 8 2018-07-11 Alert Detailed alert Timeframe Reference Document title Developing committee VA Registration dCurrent stage Stage date Guidance for multiple organizations implementing a common Warning Warning – NP decision SDT 36 ISO/NP 50009 (ISO50001) EnMS ISO/TC 301 - - 10.60 2018-06-10 Warning Warning – NP decision SDT 36 ISO/NP 31050 Guidance for managing -
JPEG File Interchange Format Version 1.02
JPEG File Interchange Format Version 1.02 September 1, 1992 Eric Hamilton C-Cube Microsystems 1778 McCarthy Blvd. Milpitas, CA 95035 +1 408 944-6300 Fax: +1 408 944-6314 E-mail: [email protected] JPEG File Interchange Format Version 1.02 Why a File Interchange Format JPEG File Interchange Format is a minimal file format which enables JPEG bitstreams to be exchanged between a wide variety of platforms and applications. This minimal format does not include any of the advanced features found in the TIFF JPEG specification or any application specific file format. Nor should it, for the only purpose of this simplified format is to allow the exchange of JPEG compressed images. JPEG File Interchange Format features • Uses JPEG compression • Uses JPEG interchange format compressed image representation • PC or Mac or Unix workstation compatible • Standard color space: one or three components. For three components, YCbCr (CCIR 601-256 levels) • APP0 marker used to specify Units, X pixel density, Y pixel density, thumbnail • APP0 marker also used to specify JFIF extensions • APP0 marker also used to specify application-specific information JPEG Compression Although any JPEG process is supported by the syntax of the JPEG File Interchange Format (JFIF) it is strongly recommended that the JPEG baseline process be used for the purposes of file interchange. This ensures maximum compatibility with all applications supporting JPEG. JFIF conforms to the JPEG Draft International Standard (ISO DIS 10918-1). The JPEG File Interchange Format is entirely compatible with the standard JPEG interchange format; the only additional requirement is the mandatory presence of the APP0 marker right after the SOI marker. -
특집 : VVC(Versatile Video Coding) 표준기술
26 특집 : VVC(Versatile Video Coding) 표준기술 특집 VVC(Versatile Video Coding) 표준기술 Versatile Video Codec 의 Picture 분할 구조 및 부호화 단위 □ 남다윤, 한종기 / 세종대학교 요 약 터를 압축할 수 있는 고성능 영상 압축 기술의 필요 본 고에서는 최근 표준화가 진행되어 2020년에 표준화 완 성이 제기되었다. 고용량 비디오 신호를 압축하는 성을 앞두고 있는 VVC 의 표준 기술들 중에서 화면 정보를 코덱 기술은 그 시대 산업체의 요청에 따라 계속 발 구성하는 픽쳐의 부호화 단위 및 분할 구조에 대해 설명한 전해왔으며, 이에 따라 다양한 표준 코덱 기술들이 다. 본 고에서 설명되는 내용들은 VTM 6.0 을 기준으로 삼는 다. 세부적으로는 한 개의 픽처를 분할하는 구조들인 슬라 발표되었다. 현재 가장 활발히 쓰이고 있는 동영상 이스, 타일, 브릭, 서브픽처에 대해서 설명한 후, 이 구조들 압축 코덱들 중에는 H.264/AVC[1] 와 HEVC[2] 가 의 내부를 구성하는 CTU 및 CU 의 분할 구조에 대해서 설명 있다. H.264/AVC 기술은 2003년에 ITU-T 와 한다. MPEG 이 공동으로 표준화한 코덱 기술이고, 높은 압축률로 선명한 영상으로 복호화 할 수 있다. I. 서 론 H.264/AVC[1] 개발 후 10년 만인 2013년에 H.264 /AVC 보다 2배 이상의 부호화 효율을 지원하는 최근 동영상 촬영 장비, 디스플레이 장비와 같은 H.265/HEVC(High Efficiency Video Coding) 가 하드웨어가 발전되고, 동시에 5 G 통신망을 통해 실 개발되었다[2]. 그 후 2018년부터는 ITU-T VCEG 시간으로 고화질 영상의 전송이 가능해졌다. 따라 (Video Coding Experts Group) 와 ISO/IEC 서 4 K(UHD) 에서 더 나아가 8 K 고초화질 영상, 멀 MPEG(Moving Picture Experts Group) 은 티뷰 영상, VR 컨텐츠와 같은 동영상 서비스에 대 JVET(Joint Video Experts Team) 그룹을 만들어, 한 관심이 높아지고 있다. -
Quadtree Based JBIG Compression
Quadtree Based JBIG Compression B. Fowler R. Arps A. El Gamal D. Yang ISL, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4055 ffowler,arps,abbas,[email protected] Abstract A JBIG compliant, quadtree based, lossless image compression algorithm is describ ed. In terms of the numb er of arithmetic co ding op erations required to co de an image, this algorithm is signi cantly faster than previous JBIG algorithm variations. Based on this criterion, our algorithm achieves an average sp eed increase of more than 9 times with only a 5 decrease in compression when tested on the eight CCITT bi-level test images and compared against the basic non-progressive JBIG algorithm. The fastest JBIG variation that we know of, using \PRES" resolution reduction and progressive buildup, achieved an average sp eed increase of less than 6 times with a 7 decrease in compression, under the same conditions. 1 Intro duction In facsimile applications it is desirable to integrate a bilevel image sensor with loss- less compression on the same chip. Suchintegration would lower p ower consumption, improve reliability, and reduce system cost. To reap these b ene ts, however, the se- lection of the compression algorithm must takeinto consideration the implementation tradeo s intro duced byintegration. On the one hand, integration enhances the p os- sibility of parallelism which, if prop erly exploited, can sp eed up compression. On the other hand, the compression circuitry cannot b e to o complex b ecause of limitations on the available chip area. Moreover, most of the chip area on a bilevel image sensor must b e o ccupied by photo detectors, leaving only the edges for digital logic. -
JPEG-Resistant Adversarial Images
JPEG-resistant Adversarial Images Richard Shin Dawn Song Computer Science Division Computer Science Division University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Several papers have explored the use of JPEG compression as a defense against adversarial images [3, 2, 5]. In this work, we show that we can generate adversarial images which survive JPEG compression, by including a differentiable approxima- tion to JPEG in the target model. By ensembling multiple target models employing varying levels of compression, we generate adversarial images with up to 691× greater success rate than the baseline method on a model using JPEG as defense. 1 Introduction Image classification models has been a highly-studied domain for adversarial examples. While adversarial images generated against these models are nevertheless very close to the original image according to L1 or L2 norm, unnatural high-frequency components or random-looking dot patterns are sometimes noticeable. As such, some proposed defenses to adversarial examples involve an initial input transformation step which attempts to remove such unnatural-looking additions. In particular, several papers [3, 2, 5] have proposed and evaluated JPEG compression as a potential method for preventing adversarial images. To summarize, they compress and then decompress an image using JPEG before providing it to the image classification model. Since JPEG is a lossy image compression method designed to preferentially preserve details important to the human visual system, the hope is that JPEG compression will keep the aspects of the image important for classification, but discard any adversarial perturbations. The method is appealingly simple and, according to the previous work, can reduce the attack success rate of adversarial examples.