JPEG-compliant perceptual coding for a grayscale image printing pipeline
We describe a procedure by which Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) compression may be customized for gray-scale images that are to be compressed before they are scaled, halftoned, and printed. Our technique maintains 100% compatibility with the JPEG standard, and is applicable with all scaling...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | IEEE transactions on image processing 1999-01, Vol.8 (1), p.1-14 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | We describe a procedure by which Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) compression may be customized for gray-scale images that are to be compressed before they are scaled, halftoned, and printed. Our technique maintains 100% compatibility with the JPEG standard, and is applicable with all scaling and halftoning methods. The JPEG quantization table is designed using frequency-domain characteristics of the scaling and halftoning operations, as well as the frequency sensitivity of the human visual system. In addition, the Huffman tables are optimized for low-rate coding. Compression artifacts are significantly reduced because they are masked by the halftoning patterns, and pushed into frequency bands where the eye is less sensitive. We describe how the frequency-domain effects of scaling and halftoning may be measured, and how to account for those effects in an iterative design procedure for the JPEG quantization table. We also present experimental results suggesting that the customized JPEG encoder typically maintains "near visually lossless" image quality at rates below 0.5 b/pixel (with reference to the number of pixels in the original image) when it is used with bilinear interpolation and either error diffusion or ordered dithering. Based on these results, we believe that in terms of the achieved bit rate, the performance of our encoder is typically at least 20% better than that of a JPEG encoder using the suggested baseline tables. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1057-7149 1941-0042 |
DOI: | 10.1109/83.736675 |