Performance Evaluation of Lossy Image Compression Techniques Based on the Image Profile

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 490)

Abstract

Digital images have become part of our everyday life. It is important to store these images in an efficient manner in the given storage space and therefore digital image compression has become a large focus in the recent years. Image compression deals with the rebate of bits required to epitomize the image. It is also important to ensure that reduction in size of image is without degradation of image quality and loss of information. As a result of this, image compression techniques have been developed with lot of new algorithms and also with variations of the already existing ones. For a given application, the image compression algorithm is selected with an objective either to provide better compression or to get a good quality of reconstructed image. The profile of the image such as aspect ratio, color, pixel intensities, smooth regions, edges, shading, pattern, and texture is not considered while selecting an algorithm. In this paper, an attempt is made to provide the users a ready reckoner to select a compression technique based on the profile of the image. In this regard, three popular techniques such as set partitioning in hierarchical tree (SPIHT), compressive sensing (CS), and fractal coding (FC) in the family of lossy image compression are selected for analysis. In addition to this, the best choice of wavelet filter banks, measurement matrix, and reconstruction algorithm are also identified to provide improved performance. The performances of these algorithms are evaluated with the metrics such as compression ratio (CR), mean square error (MSE), and peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR).

References

  1. 1.
    Ebrahim M, Chong CW (2014) A Comprehensive review of distributed coding for algorithms for visual sensor network. Int J Commun Netw Inf Secur (IJCNIS) 6(2):104Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arora K, Shukla M (2014) A comprehensive review of image compression techniques. Int J Comput Sci Inf Technol 5(2):1169–1172Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pokle PB, Bawane NG (2013) Comparative study of various image compression techniques. Int J Sci Eng Res 4(5)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Singh P, Sharma S, Singh B (2012) Comparative analysis of embedded zero tree and fractal image compression techniques. Int J Adv Res Fractal Image Compres Tech 2(2)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nahar PC, Kolte MT (2014) An introduction to compressive sensing and its applications. Int J Sci Res Publ 4(6)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rawat CS, Meher S (2013) A hybrid image compression scheme using DCT and fractal image compression. Int Arab J Inf Technol 10(6):553–562Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chourasiya R, Shrivastava A (2012) A study of image compression based transmission algorithm using SPHIT for low bit rate application. Adv Comput Int J (ACIJ) 3(6):117–122Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Patil BS (2015) Image security in wireless sensor networks using wavelet coding. Int J Emerg Technol 6(2):239 (Special Issue on NCRIET-2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chetan E, Deepak Sharma E (2015) Fractal image compression using quad tree decomposition & DWT. Int J Sci Eng Res (IJSER) 3(7)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li X, Bi G (2015) Image reconstruction based on the improved compressive sensing algorithm. In: IEEE international conference on digital signal processing, July-2015Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Donoho DL (2006) Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(4):1289–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringSRM UniversityKattankulathur, ChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations