Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Key Takeaways
Figures
Introduction
Statistical Redundancies
Conclusion
References

Comparison of Video Compression Standards

Profile image of Pon LathaPon Latha
https://doi.org/10.7763/IJCEE.2013.V5.770
visibility

…

description

6 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

In order to ensure compatibility among video codecs from different manufacturers and applications and to simplify the development of new applications, intensive efforts have been undertaken in recent years to define digital video standards Over the past decades, digital video compression technologies have become an integral part of the way we create, communicate and consume visual information. Digital video communication can be found today in many application sceneries such as broadcast services over satellite and terrestrial channels, digital video storage, wires and wireless conversational services and etc. The data quantity is very large for the digital video and the memory of the storage devices and the bandwidth of the transmission channel are not infinite, so it is not practical for us to store the full digital video without processing. For instance, we have a 720 x 480 pixels per frame,30 frames per second, total 90 minutes full color video, then the full data quantity of this video is about 167.96 G bytes. Thus, several video compression standards, techniques and algorithms had been developed to reduce the data quantity and provide the acceptable quality as possible as can. Thus they often represent an optimal compromise between performance and complexity. This paper describes the main features of video compression standards, discusses the emerging standards and presents some of its main characteristics.

Key takeaways
sparkles

AI

  1. Video compression standards facilitate compatibility across codecs and support efficient digital video applications.
  2. MPEG-1 supports up to 1.5 Mbps, allowing 72 minutes of VHS quality video on CD-ROM.
  3. H.264 achieves a 50% bit rate reduction for fixed quality compared to previous standards.
  4. Compression techniques exploit perceptual, temporal, spatial, and statistical redundancies in video data.
  5. Emerging standards like H.265 and VP8 aim for further improvements in compression efficiency.
Figures (9)
Fig. 1. A three-picture JPEG video sequence. The first public standard of the MPEG committee was the MPEG-1, ISO/IEC 11172, which first parts were released in 1993. MPEG-1 video compression is based upon the same technique that is used in JPEG[6]. In addition to that it also includes techniques for efficient coding of a video sequence. Consider the video sequence displayed in Fig. 2. The picture to the left is the first picture in the sequence followed by the picture in the middle and then the picture to the right. When displayed, the video sequence shows a man walking from right to left with a tree that stands still.In Motion JPEG/Motion JPEG 2000 each picture in the sequence is coded as a separate unique picture resulting in the same sequence as the original one. In MPEG video only the new parts of the video sequence is included together
Fig. 1. A three-picture JPEG video sequence. The first public standard of the MPEG committee was the MPEG-1, ISO/IEC 11172, which first parts were released in 1993. MPEG-1 video compression is based upon the same technique that is used in JPEG[6]. In addition to that it also includes techniques for efficient coding of a video sequence. Consider the video sequence displayed in Fig. 2. The picture to the left is the first picture in the sequence followed by the picture in the middle and then the picture to the right. When displayed, the video sequence shows a man walking from right to left with a tree that stands still.In Motion JPEG/Motion JPEG 2000 each picture in the sequence is coded as a separate unique picture resulting in the same sequence as the original one. In MPEG video only the new parts of the video sequence is included together
Fig. 2. A three-picture MPEG video sequence. with information of the moving parts [7]. The video sequence of Fig. 4 will then appear as in Fig. 4. But this is only true during the transmission of the video sequence to limit the bandwidth consumption. When displayed it appears as the original video sequence again. MPEG-1 is focused on bit-streams of about 1,5 Mbps and originally for storage of digital video on CDs. The focus is on compression ratio rather than picture quality. It can be considered as traditional VCR quality but digital instead. MPEG-1, the Coding of Moving Pictures and Associated Audio for Digital Storage Media at up to about 1.5 Mbps, is an International Standard ISO-11172, completed in October, 1992. Intemational Standard ISO-11 October, 1992. MPEG-1 is intended interactive video applications (CD-RO one can store up to 72 minutes of VHS 30fps) video and audio on a single CD- can deliver full-motion color video at 3 172, completed in primarily for stored M); with MPEG-1, quality (640 x 480 s ROM disk. MPEG-1 0 frames per second from CD-ROM. Because audio is usually associated with compression of the audio information by JVC. full motion video, the MPEG standard also addresses the at 64, 96, 128, and 192 kbps[8] and identifies the synchronization issues between audio and video by means of time stamps. The first volume application for MPEG-1 decode chips (from C- Cube Microsystems) was a Karaoke entertainment system
Fig. 2. A three-picture MPEG video sequence. with information of the moving parts [7]. The video sequence of Fig. 4 will then appear as in Fig. 4. But this is only true during the transmission of the video sequence to limit the bandwidth consumption. When displayed it appears as the original video sequence again. MPEG-1 is focused on bit-streams of about 1,5 Mbps and originally for storage of digital video on CDs. The focus is on compression ratio rather than picture quality. It can be considered as traditional VCR quality but digital instead. MPEG-1, the Coding of Moving Pictures and Associated Audio for Digital Storage Media at up to about 1.5 Mbps, is an International Standard ISO-11172, completed in October, 1992. Intemational Standard ISO-11 October, 1992. MPEG-1 is intended interactive video applications (CD-RO one can store up to 72 minutes of VHS 30fps) video and audio on a single CD- can deliver full-motion color video at 3 172, completed in primarily for stored M); with MPEG-1, quality (640 x 480 s ROM disk. MPEG-1 0 frames per second from CD-ROM. Because audio is usually associated with compression of the audio information by JVC. full motion video, the MPEG standard also addresses the at 64, 96, 128, and 192 kbps[8] and identifies the synchronization issues between audio and video by means of time stamps. The first volume application for MPEG-1 decode chips (from C- Cube Microsystems) was a Karaoke entertainment system
Fig. 4. H.261 source coder block diagram. a The H.261 source code operates on non-interlaced pictures occurring 30 000/1001 (approximately 29.97) times per second. The tolerance on picture frequency is +50 ppm. Pictures are coded as luminance and two color difference components (Y, Cg, and Cr). These components and the codes representing their sampled values are as defined in CCIR Recommendation 601: black = 16, white = 235, zero color difference = 128, and peak color difference = 16 and 240. These values are nominal ones and the coding algorithm functions with input values of 1 through to 254. It is important to understand the hierarchical structure of video data used by H.261 in Fig. 4. At the top layer is the picture. Each picture is divided into groups of blocks (GOBs). Twelve GOBs make up a CIF image; three make up a QCIF picture in Fig. 5. A GOB relates to 176 pixels by 48 lines of Y and the spatially corresponding 88 pixels by 24 lines for each chrominance value.
Fig. 4. H.261 source coder block diagram. a The H.261 source code operates on non-interlaced pictures occurring 30 000/1001 (approximately 29.97) times per second. The tolerance on picture frequency is +50 ppm. Pictures are coded as luminance and two color difference components (Y, Cg, and Cr). These components and the codes representing their sampled values are as defined in CCIR Recommendation 601: black = 16, white = 235, zero color difference = 128, and peak color difference = 16 and 240. These values are nominal ones and the coding algorithm functions with input values of 1 through to 254. It is important to understand the hierarchical structure of video data used by H.261 in Fig. 4. At the top layer is the picture. Each picture is divided into groups of blocks (GOBs). Twelve GOBs make up a CIF image; three make up a QCIF picture in Fig. 5. A GOB relates to 176 pixels by 48 lines of Y and the spatially corresponding 88 pixels by 24 lines for each chrominance value.
Fig. 3. H.261 block diagram from ITU recommendation. quantization, and entropy coding. While the decoder requires prediction, motion compensation is an option. Another option inside the recommendation is loop filtering. The loop filer is applied to the prediction data to reduce large errors when using interframe coding. Loop filtering provides a noticeable improvement in video quality but demands extra processing power. The operation of the decoder allows for many H.261-compliant CODECs to provide very different levels of quality at different cost points. The H.261 standard does not specify a particular adaptive quantization method.
Fig. 3. H.261 block diagram from ITU recommendation. quantization, and entropy coding. While the decoder requires prediction, motion compensation is an option. Another option inside the recommendation is loop filtering. The loop filer is applied to the prediction data to reduce large errors when using interframe coding. Loop filtering provides a noticeable improvement in video quality but demands extra processing power. The operation of the decoder allows for many H.261-compliant CODECs to provide very different levels of quality at different cost points. The H.261 standard does not specify a particular adaptive quantization method.
TABLE I: H. 263 PICTURE FORMATS
TABLE I: H. 263 PICTURE FORMATS
Fig. 5. Arrangement of groups of blocks in an H.261 picture.
Fig. 5. Arrangement of groups of blocks in an H.261 picture.
TABLE III:MPEG Comparison with Pros & Cons
TABLE III:MPEG Comparison with Pros & Cons
Fig. 6. H.264 encoder was at least three times more efficient than an MPEG-4 encoder and at least six times more efficient than with Motion JPEG. choose to implement different sets of tools defined by a standard. As long as the output of an encoder conforms to a standard’s format and decoder, it is possible to make different implementations. An MPEG standard, therefore, cannot guarantee a given bit rate or quality, and comparisons cannot be properly made without first defining how the standards are implemented in an encoder. A decoder, unlike an encoder, must implement all the required parts of a standard in order to decode a compliant bit stream. A standard specifies exactly how a decompression algorithm should restore every bit of a compressed video.
Fig. 6. H.264 encoder was at least three times more efficient than an MPEG-4 encoder and at least six times more efficient than with Motion JPEG. choose to implement different sets of tools defined by a standard. As long as the output of an encoder conforms to a standard’s format and decoder, it is possible to make different implementations. An MPEG standard, therefore, cannot guarantee a given bit rate or quality, and comparisons cannot be properly made without first defining how the standards are implemented in an encoder. A decoder, unlike an encoder, must implement all the required parts of a standard in order to decode a compliant bit stream. A standard specifies exactly how a decompression algorithm should restore every bit of a compressed video.

Related papers

A tutorial on image/video coding standards
Oscar Au

2013 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference, 2013

The field of image and video compression has gone through rapid growth during the past thirty years, leading to various coding standards. The main goal of continuous efforts on image/video coding standardization is to achieve low bit rate for data storage and transmission, while maintaining acceptable distortion. In this paper, various developmental stages of image and video compression standards are reviewed, including JPEG and JPEG 2000 image standards, MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4, H.261, H.263, H.264/MPEG-4 AVC, and the latest international video standard HEVC as well as Chinese video coding standard AVS. Key features and major applications of the standards will be briefly introduced and the compression performance of the standards at each stage will be compared and discussed.

View PDFchevron_right
A Comparative Study of Video Compression Techniques
International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology IJSRSET

In modern world more image and video compression technologies improving gradually. But major barrier of the new technologies concepts are repeated from authors. Because authors can’t find in depth of the papers from various technologies. So Survey of Video Compression Techniques very helpful for these types problems in video compression areas. Video compression techniques such as DCT coding, Quantization, Entropy coding, Motion estimation are widely used in video compression techniques. The main focus of this paper is to analyse video compression techniques required for video processing especially to discover how much amount of data to compressed, which techniques is faster and visual quality better and so on. We evaluate the video compression techniques for finding compression ratio in terms of performance, speed and accuracy. We also compare video compression techniques with conventional methods.

View PDFchevron_right
Contemporary Video Compression Standards. H.265/HEVC, VP9, VP10, Daala
N. Markov, Maxim Sharabayko

In this paper we compare compression efficiency of the latest video coding standards H.265/HEVC, VP9, VP10 and Daala to H.264/AVC with the help of reference video encoders available. Experimental results show that H.265/HEVC on average provides 37–40% bitrate savings, VP9 provides 9– 11%, VP10 – 10–12% bitrate savings, while Daala provides 8-9% bitrate overhead on average.

View PDFchevron_right
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF H.265 & H.264 VIDEO COMPRESSION
IJESRT Journal

Video is the sequence of images played with respect to time. The successive images are highly correlated with each other. Video compression algorithms take the advantage of this fact. Only the residual information is transmitted using the technique called as block based motion estimation and motion compensation [2]. MPEG1 (Motion Picture Expert Group), MPEG2, MPEG4, H.261, H.263, H.264 are the ancestors of H.265. Work on the emerging " Advanced Video Coding " (AVC) standard now known as ITU-T(International Telecommunication Union) Recommendation H.264 and as ISO 14496(International Organization For Standards) (MPEG-4) Part 10 has dominated the video coding standardization community. The work has been stimulating, intense, dynamic, and all-consuming for those of us most deeply involved in its design. The time has arrived to see what has been accomplished. The new H.264/AVC & Enhanced version H.265 standard is designed to provide a technical solution, the H.265 is the latest video compression technique in which 50% of bit rate is saved more than H.264 and broad range of applications, including broadcast over cable, satellite, cable modem, and terrestrial. It finds the applications in interactive or serial storage on optical and magnetic storage devices, DVDs (Digital Video Disk). Conventional services over Ethernet, LAN (Local Area Network), wireless and mobile network and mobile.

View PDFchevron_right
Special Section Guest Editorial: Video Compression Technology
ofer hadar

Optical Engineering, 2013

Nowadays, we cannot imagine our life without video content and without devices that enable us to acquire and display such content. According to recent research, in 2012, the video content transfer over the Internet was around 60% of the overall Internet data transfer, and the overall video transfer (including the Internet) could reach 90% during the next four years. The TV sets supporting only full high-definition (HD) resolution (i.e., 1080p) are already considered to be outdated due to a dramatic demand for the ultra-HD resolution that often refers to 3840 × 2160 (4K) or 7680 × 4320 (8K) resolutions. So, what are the key factors for such tremendous progress? If you are reading this special section on video compression technology, we are sure that you know the answer.. . This Optical Engineering special section attempts to provide an overview of the recent achievements in video compression technology, with articles written by professionals and experts in this field. Particularly, this special section consists of eight articles, which can be divided into four groups. The first group of articles consists of three papers and addresses various issues related to the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video coding standard, particularly with regard to the video decoding process. The article "Optimal complexity scalable H.264/AVC video decoding scheme for portable multimedia devices" by H. Lee et al. presents a complexity-scalable H.264/MPEG-4 AVC-based video decoding scheme, thereby enabling control over decoding computational complexity in a scalable manner. Also, the article "Enhanced low bitrate H.264 video coding using decoder-side super-resolution and frame interpolation" by H. F. Ates offers a decoderside super-resolution (SR) and motion-compensated frame interpolation (MCFI) algorithms for improving the H.264/ MPEG-4 AVC coding efficiency. In addition, a fast decoding method is proposed for the context-adaptive variable length coding (CAVLC) by D. W. Ki and J. H. Kim in the article "Fast multiple run_before decoding method for efficient implementation of an H.264/AVC context-adaptive variable length coding decoder." The second group contains an article titled "Spatial and interlayer hybrid intra-prediction for H.264/SVC video" by C.-S. Park, which relates to the scalable extension of the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video coding standard, i.e., to the scalable video coding (SVC) standard. In his work, Park aims to improve the intra-prediction performance by adaptively Ofer Hadar received BSc, MSc (cum laude), and PhD degrees from the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, in 1990, 1992, and 1997, respectively, all in electrical and computer engineering. The prestigious Clore Fellowship supported his PhD studies. His PhD dissertation dealt with the effects of vibrations and motion on image quality and target acquisition.

View PDFchevron_right
A Survey on Performance Comparison of Video Coding Algorithms
Kiran Babu

Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 2021

State-of-the-art video compression techniques play a vital role in coding and decoding of video images that consume enormous memory space. In general, video compression is widely adapted for all future mobile applications based on recent developed technologies that are inbuilt into architectures to establish communication links with minimum consumption of power and memory for visual audio and video information. High-quality video consumes more memory for a server/user which is a major drawback in video compression. We present a conceptually generic, pliable and prevalent approach to overcome this issue in video compression with minimum memory space. However, storing and backup maintenance of these large data in an efficient way have been provided the researchers a roadmap in developing novel algorithms and techniques. A video compression technique plays a vital role in storage and transmission of data through the limited bandwidth capability. In this paper, authors mentioned advanced technologies in video compression by providing identical quality and recognizing more content of video. In this paper, authors focus on compressors and decompressors (CODECs) which are there like high-efficiency video coding (HEVC/H.265) that is capable to compress the video of any resolutions like 8192 * 4320 including 8K ultra-high definition (UHD) (John Singh et al. in Int J Pure Appl Math 119:3709–3724, [1]). The author highlights the algorithmic approach that describes the prerequisites for HEVC on playback on the web browser and compression of high-definition video for live video streaming, key factors in developments in dividing the video frames into a few subsections to high compression ratio and to retrieve the same video frames with high quality and more accurately (Garcia-Pineda et al. in Comput Commun, [2]). Keywords: Video compression · CODEC · HEVC/H.265 · UHD

View PDFchevron_right
Video Compression Technology
ofer hadar

2013

Nowadays, we cannot imagine our life without video content and without devices that enable us to acquire and display such content. According to recent research, in 2012, the video content transfer over the Internet was around 60% of the overall Internet data transfer, and the overall video transfer (including the Internet) could reach 90% during the next four years. The TV sets supporting only full high-definition (HD) resolution (i.e., 1080p) are already considered to be outdated due to a dramatic demand for the ultra-HD resolution that often refers to 3840 × 2160 (4K) or 7680 × 4320 (8K) resolutions. So, what are the key factors for such tremendous progress? If you are reading this special section on video compression technology, we are sure that you know the answer.. . This Optical Engineering special section attempts to provide an overview of the recent achievements in video compression technology, with articles written by professionals and experts in this field. Particularly, this special section consists of eight articles, which can be divided into four groups. The first group of articles consists of three papers and addresses various issues related to the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video coding standard, particularly with regard to the video decoding process. The article "Optimal complexity scalable H.264/AVC video decoding scheme for portable multimedia devices" by H. Lee et al. presents a complexity-scalable H.264/MPEG-4 AVC-based video decoding scheme, thereby enabling control over decoding computational complexity in a scalable manner. Also, the article "Enhanced low bitrate H.264 video coding using decoder-side super-resolution and frame interpolation" by H. F. Ates offers a decoderside super-resolution (SR) and motion-compensated frame interpolation (MCFI) algorithms for improving the H.264/ MPEG-4 AVC coding efficiency. In addition, a fast decoding method is proposed for the context-adaptive variable length coding (CAVLC) by D. W. Ki and J. H. Kim in the article "Fast multiple run_before decoding method for efficient implementation of an H.264/AVC context-adaptive variable length coding decoder." The second group contains an article titled "Spatial and interlayer hybrid intra-prediction for H.264/SVC video" by C.-S. Park, which relates to the scalable extension of the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video coding standard, i.e., to the scalable video coding (SVC) standard. In his work, Park aims to improve the intra-prediction performance by adaptively Ofer Hadar received BSc, MSc (cum laude), and PhD degrees from the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, in 1990, 1992, and 1997, respectively, all in electrical and computer engineering. The prestigious Clore Fellowship supported his PhD studies. His PhD dissertation dealt with the effects of vibrations and motion on image quality and target acquisition.

View PDFchevron_right
Video-Compression-Video-Coding-for-Next-generation-Multimedia.pdf
Amir Nz
View PDFchevron_right
Video Compressionebu Technical Review – 2008 Q2 1 / 22
Ludovic Noblet

2015

Scalable Video Coding (SVC) is a recent amendment to the ISO/ITU Advanced Video Coding (H.264/AVC) standard, which provides optional but efficient scalability functionalities on top of the high coding efficiency of H.264/AVC. In addition to bringing a cost-efficient solution to the delivery of different formats of the same content to multiple users, it can be used to provide a better viewing experience (enhanced content portability, device power / content-quality adaptation, fast zapping times and fluid forward / rewind functions, efficient error retransmission, etc.). This article describes the potential of SVC, in terms of applications and performance. A brief overview of SVC functionalities, as well as practical use cases, are given in the following sections. Different performance evaluations, based on test results, are also described. 1.

View PDFchevron_right
An Overview of Emerging Video Coding Standards
Ticao Zhang

GetMobile: Mobile Computing and Communications

Today's popular video coding standards, such as H.264/AVC, are widely used to encode video into bit streams for storage and transmission. With the explosive growth of various video applications, H.264/AVC may not fully satisfy their requirements anymore. There is an increasing demand for high compression efficiency and low complexity video coding standards. In this article, we provide an overview of existing and emerging video coding standards. We review the timeline of the development of the popular H.26X family video coding standards, and introduce several emerging video coding standards such as AV1, VP9 and VVC. As for future video coding, considering the success of machine learning in various fields and hardware acceleration, we conclude this article with a discussion of several future trends in video coding.

View PDFchevron_right

References (15)

  1. ITU-T and ISO/IEC JTC 1, "Generic coding of moving pictures and associated audio information -Part 2: Video," ISO/IEC 13818-2 (MPEG-2), 1994.
  2. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29, "Coding of Audio-Visual Objects," ISO/IEC 14496-2, International Standard: 1999/Amd1, 2000.
  3. A. Puri, X. Chen, and A. Luthra, "Video Coding Using the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC Compression Standard," Signal Processing: Image Communication, September 2004 issue.
  4. ISO/IEC JTC 1, "Advanced video coding," ISO/IEC FDIS 14496-10, International Standard, 2003.
  5. M. Horowitz, A. Joch, F. Kossentini, and A. Hallapuro, "H.264/AVC Baseline Profile Decoder Complexity Analysis," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 704-716, 2003.
  6. T. Wiegand, G. J. Sullivan, G. Bjontegaard, and A. Luthra, "Overview of the H.264/AVC Video CodingStandard," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 560-576, 2003.
  7. I. E. G. Richardson, H.264 and MPEG-4 Video Compression, UK Wiley, 2003.
  8. M. Flierl, T. Wiegand, and B. Girod, "Multihypothesis Pictures for H.26L," IEEE ICIP 2001, Greece,2001
  9. M. Flierl and B. Girod, "Generalized B Pictures and the Draft H.264/AVC Video-Compression Standard," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 587-597, 2003.
  10. D. Marpe, H. Schwarz, and T. Wiegand, "Context-Based Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding in the H.264/AVC Video Compression Standard," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 620-636, 2003.
  11. Z. Zhou, M. T. Sun, and S. Hsu, "Fast Variable Block-size Motion Estimation Algorithms Based on Merge and Split Procedure for H.264/MPEG-4 AVC," IEEE ISCAS 2004 Conference.
  12. Z. Zhou and M. T. Sun, "Fast Macroblock Inter Mode Decision and Motion Estimation for H.264/MPEG-4 AVC," IEEE ICIP 2004 Conference.
  13. P. Chen and J. W. Woods, "Improved MC-EZBC with quarter- pixel motion vectors," ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, MPEG2002/m8366, 2002.
  14. J. Xu, R. Xiong, B. Feng, G. Sullivan, M. Lee, F. Wu, and S. Li, "3D Sub-band Video Coding using Barbell lifting," ISO/IEC JTC/WG11 M10569.
  15. M. Karczewicz and R. Kurceren, "The SP-and SI-Frames Design for H.264/AVC," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 637-644, 2003.

Related papers

A Comparative Analysis of Video Compression Standard and Algorithms: State of the Art
VINCENT ABANIHI, momoh muyideen

ATBU, Journal of Science, Technology & Education (JOSTE), 2020

The advancement in the internet technology fosters the application of video streaming which is gaining more awareness amidst the populace. The application of video streaming includes internet broadcasting, video conferencing and video lecture among others. In video transmission, either through wired or wireless, a lot of images are needed to create an illusion of continuity. Therefore, there is need for effective utilization of storage space and allocated bandwidth. In lieu of this, digital video standards and methods have been proffered by researchers and manufacturers in order to ensure compatibility among video codec from different manufacturers and to simplify the development of newer applications. This paper presents a comparative study of the emerging and current video compression standards with a demonstration of some of the compression algorithms that are being employed in digital video compression.

View PDFchevron_right
An overview Survey on Various Video compressions and its importance
Ijaems Journal

With the rise of digital computing and visual data processing, the need for storage and transmission of video data became prevalent. Storage and transmission of uncompressed raw visual data is not a good practice, because it requires a large storage space and great bandwidth. Video compression algorithms can compress this raw visual data or video into smaller files with a little sacrifice on the quality. This paper an overview and comparison of standard efforts on video compression algorithm of: MPEG-1,

View PDFchevron_right
Performance Analysis of Various Video Compression Techniques
Dinesh Goyal
View PDFchevron_right
Image and video Coding standards
Atul Puri

1993

Image and Video Coding Standards Mostimage or video applications involving transmission or storage require some form ofdatacompression to reducethe otherwise inordinate demand on bandwidth and storage. Compatibility among different applications and manufacturers is very desirable, and often essential. This paper describes several standard compression algorithms developed in recentyears.

View PDFchevron_right
Implementation of Video Compression Standards in Digital Television
Mile Petrović

Recent Advances in Image and Video Coding, 2016

In this paper, a video compression standard used in digital television systems is discussed. Basic concepts of video compression and principles of lossy and lossless compression are given. Techniques of video compression (intraframe and interframe compression), the type of frames and principles of the bit rate compression are discussed. Characteristics of standard-definition television (SDTV), high-definition television (HDTV) and ultra-high-definition television (UHDTV) are given. The principles of the MPEG-2, MPEG-4 and High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) compression standards are analyzed. Overview of basic standards of video compression and the impact of compression on the quality of TV images and the number of TV channels in the multiplexes of terrestrial and satellite digital TV transmission are shown. This work is divided into six sections.

View PDFchevron_right

Cited by

Metaheuristic-based vector quantization approach: a new paradigm for neural network-based video compression
Saad Darwish

Multimedia Tools and Applications

Video compression has great significance in the communication of motion pictures. Video compression techniques try to remove the different types of redundancy within or between video sequences. In the temporal domain, the video compression techniques remove the redundancies between the highly correlated consequence frames of the video. In the spatial domain, the video compression techniques remove the redundancies between the highly correlated consequence pixels (samples) in the same frame. Evolving neural-networks based video coding research efforts are focused on improving existing video codecs by performing better predictions that are incorporated within the same codec framework or holistic methods of end-to-end video compression schemes. Current neural network-based video compression adapts static codebook to achieve compression that leads to learning inability from new samples. This paper proposes a modified video compression model that adapts the genetic algorithm to build an optimal codebook for adaptive vector quantization that is used as an activation function inside the neural network's hidden layer. Background subtraction algorithm is employed to extract motion objects within frames to generate the context-based initial codebook. Furthermore, Differential Pulse Code Modulation (DPCM) is utilized for lossless compression of significant wavelet coefficients; whereas low energy coefficients are lossy compressed using Learning Vector Quantization (LVQ) neural networks. Finally, Run Length Encoding (RLE) is engaged to encode the quantized coefficients to achieve a higher compression ratio. Experiments have proven the system's ability to achieve higher compression ratio with acceptable efficiency measured by PSNR.

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved