Path: news1.ucsd.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!Germany.EU.net!main.Germany.EU.net!EU.net!news.mathworks.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!jloup
From: gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu (Jean-loup Gailly)
Newsgroups: comp.compression,comp.compression.research,news.answers,comp.answers
Subject: comp.compression Frequently Asked Questions (part 1/3)
Supersedes: <compr1_20aug96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Followup-To: comp.compression
Date: 20 Sep 1996 13:11:31 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 3522
Approved: news-answers-request@mit.edu
Distribution: world
Expires: 15 Nov 1996 16:17:20 GMT
Message-ID: <compr1_20sep96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Reply-To: gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Summary: *** READ THIS BEFORE POSTING ***
Keywords: data compression, FAQ
Originator: jloup@spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Xref: news1.ucsd.edu comp.compression:23971 comp.compression.research:2003 news.answers:65423 comp.answers:16345
Archive-name: compression-faq/part1
Last-modified: Sep 20th, 1996
"I've already explained this once, but repetition is
the very soul of the net." (from alt.config)
This file is part 1 of a set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for
the groups comp.compression and comp.compression.research. If you
can't find part 2 or 3, see item 53 below. A copy of this FAQ is available
by ftp in ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/
files part1 to part3. This FAQ is also accessible in the World Wide Web at
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/compression-faq/top.html
or http://www.cs.ruu.nl/wais/html/na-dir/compression-faq/.html
Certain questions get asked time and again, and this is an attempt to
reduce the bandwidth taken up by these posts and their associated
replies. If you have a question, *please* check this file before you
post. It may save a lot of peoples time.
If you have not already read the overall Usenet introductory material
posted to "news.announce.newusers", please do. It is also available by
ftp in ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/doc-net/usenews.zip (see item 2 below
about .zip).
If you don't want to see this FAQ regularly, please add the subject
line to your kill file. If you don't know what a kill file is, get
by ftp the file ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/killfile-faq
If you have corrections or suggestions for this FAQ, send them to
Jean-loup Gailly <gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu>. Thank you.
Part 1 is oriented towards practical usage of compression programs.
Part 2 is more intended for people who want to know how compression works.
Part 3 is a long (but somewhat obsolete) list of image compression hardware.
Main changes relative to the previous version:
- new address for the compression pointers [item 1]
- added pointer to Info-Mac HyperArchive [item 2]
- fixed many references to Simtel [item 2]
- more patents on arithmetic coding [item 8]
- more information about the patent on compression of random data [item 9.5]
- added pointer to yet another implementation of arithmetic coding [item 13]
- sources for DCT algorithms removed from ftp [item 15]
- new address for wavethresh [item 15]
- added pointer to the Wavelet Transform Coder Construction Kit [items 15 & 72]
- new address for the Wavelet Digest home page [item 72]
- new version of bzip [item 78]
Contents
========
General questions:
[1] What are these newsgroups about?
[2] What is this .xxx file type?
Where can I find the corresponding compression program?
[3] What is the latest pkzip version?
[4] What is an archiver?
[5] What is the best general purpose compression program?
[7] Which books should I read?
[8] What about patents on data compression algorithms?
[9] Compression of random data (WEB, Gilbert and others)
[10] Fake compression programs (OWS, WIC)
[11] What is the V.42bis standard?
[12] I need source for the winners of the Dr Dobbs compression contest
[13] I need source for arithmetic coding
Image and audio compression:
[15] Where can I get image compression programs?
[16] What is the state of the art in lossless image compression?
[17] What is the state of fractal compression?
[18] I need specs and source for TIFF and CCITT group 4 Fax.
[19] What is JPEG?
[20] I am looking for source of an H.261/H.263 codec and MPEG
[25] Fast DCT (Discrete Cosine Transform) algorithms
[26] Are there algorithms and standards for audio compression?
Common problems:
[30] My archive is corrupted!
[31] pkunzip reports a CRC error!
[32] VMS zip is not compatible with pkzip!
[33] I have a problem with Stacker or DoubleSpace!
Questions which do not really belong to comp.compression:
[50] What is this 'tar' compression program?
[51] I need a CRC algorithm
[52] What about those people who continue to ask frequently asked questions?
[53] Where are FAQ lists archived?
[54] I need specs for graphics formats
[55] Where can I find Lenna and other images?
[56] I am looking for a message digest algorithm
[57] I have lost my password on a .zip file
Part 2: (Long) introductions to data compression techniques
[70] Introduction to data compression (long)
Huffman and Related Compression Techniques
Arithmetic Coding
Substitutional Compressors
The LZ78 family of compressors
The LZ77 family of compressors
[71] Introduction to MPEG (long)
What is MPEG?
Does it have anything to do with JPEG?
Then what's JBIG and MHEG?
What has MPEG accomplished?
So how does MPEG I work?
What about the audio compression?
So how much does it compress?
What's phase II?
When will all this be finished?
How do I join MPEG?
How do I get the documents, like the MPEG I draft?
[72] What is wavelet theory?
[73] What is the theoretical compression limit?
[74] Introduction to JBIG
[75] Introduction to JPEG
[76] What is Vector Quantization?
[77] Introduction to Fractal compression
[78] The Burrows-Wheeler block sorting algorithm
Part 3: (Long) list of image compression hardware
[85] Image compression hardware
[99] Acknowledgments
Search for "Subject: [#]" to get to question number # quickly. Some news
readers can also take advantage of the message digest format used here.
If you know very little about data compression, read question 70 in
part 2 first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [1] What are these newsgroups about?
comp.compression is the place to discuss about data compression, both
lossless (for text or data) and lossy (for images, sound, etc..).
comp.compression.research was created later to provide a forum for
current research on data compression and data compression algorithms;
this group is now moderated. If you are not experienced in data compression,
please post in comp.compression only.
An archive of this newsgroup since Oct 1993 is available in
ftp://spib.rice.edu/pub/news/comp.compression/
An excellent collection of compression based information is provided at
http://www.internz.com/compression-pointers.html
If you only want to find a particular compression program for a
particular operating system, please read first this FAQ and the
article "How to find sources" which is regularly posted in
news.answers.
If you can't resist posting such a request, other groups are probably
more appropriate (comp.binaries.ibm.pc.wanted, comp.os.msdos.apps,
comp.sources.wanted, comp.sys.mac.wanted, comp.archives.msdos.d, comp.dsp,
alt.graphics.pixutils). Please post your request in comp.compression
only as a last resource.
If your question is about graphics only (no compression), please
post to comp.graphics.misc, *after* reading the comp.graphics FAQ (see
item 54 below). For some unknown reason, many questions about
graphics are incorrectly posted to comp.compression.
For questions related to audio compression, check also comp.dsp.
Please do not post any program in binary form to comp.compression.
Very short sources can be posted, but long sources should be be posted
to the specialized source groups, such as comp.sources.* or alt.sources.
If the program is already available by ftp, just give the name of the
ftp site and the full path name of the file.
As for any newsgroups, do not post the same message separately to
comp.compression and comp.compression.research.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [2] What is this .xxx file type?
Where can I find the corresponding compression program?
All the programs mentioned in this section are lossless. For most
programs, one US and one European ftp site are given. (ftp.coast.net
& garbo.uwasa.fi) Many other sites (in particular wuarchive.wustl.edu)
have the same programs.
To keep this list to a reasonable size, many programs are not
mentioned here. Additional information can be found in the file
ftp://ftp.cso.uiuc.edu/pub/doc/pcnet/compression maintained by
David Lemson (lemson@uiuc.edu). When several programs can handle
the same archive format, only one of them is given. If you don't
find a particular MSDOS archiver here, look also in
ftp://ftp.cs.tu-berlin.de/pub/msdos/mirrors/ftp.elf.stuba.sk/pc/
Sources for additional lossless data compressors can be found in
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/programming/lds_11.zip
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcutils/lz-comp2.zip
http://wwwvms.utexas.edu/~cbloom/index.html
ftp://ftp.imag.fr/pub/archive/compression/codecs/codecs.tgz
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/turbopas/preskit2.zip (sources in Pascal)
ftp://ftp.cs.uiowa.edu/pub/jones/compress/ (Splay tree compression)
For Macintosh programs, look on ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac
on in http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/HyperArchive.html
For VM/CMS, look on ftp://vmd.cso.uiuc.edu/public.477
For Atari, look on ftp://atari.archive.umich.edu
For Amiga, look on ftp://ftp.wustl.edu/pub/aminet/
A general purpose lossless data compression library is available in
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/zlib/zlib-1.0.4.tar.gz or zlib104.zip;
see http://quest.jpl.nasa.gov/zlib/ for more information.
If you don't know how to use ftp or don't have ftp access, read the
article "How to find sources" which is regularly posted in news.answers.
If you can't find a program given below, it is likely that a newer
version exists in the same directory. (Tell me <gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu>)
A very short description of the compression algorithm is given for
most programs. For the meaning of LZ77, LZ78 and LZW, see question 70
in part 2 of the FAQ. If you are looking for the file format of a
specific compression program, get the sources of the decompressor.
For the format of uuencode, do "man 5 uuencode" on a Unix box.
ext: produced by or read by
.arc, .ark: arc, pkarc for MSDOS. (LZW algorithm)
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/msdos/starter/pk361.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/pk361.exe
arc for Unix
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/misc/unix/arc521e.tar-z
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/arc.tar.Z
Contact: Howard Chu <hyc@umix.cc.umich.edu>
arc for VMS
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/packages/compression/vax-vms/arc.exe
for Mac
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/systems/mac/info-mac/cmp/stuffit-expander-352.hqx
arc for Amiga
ftp.funet.fi:pub/amiga/fish/001-100/ff070/arc.lha
.arj: arj for MSDOS (LZ77 with hashing, plus secondary static Huffman
encoding on a block basis)
Contact: Robert K Jung <robjung@world.std.com>
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/arj250a.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/arj250a.exe
unarj for Unix. Decompresses only. (There is no arj compressor for Unix.
Don't post a request.)
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/misc/unix/unarj241.tar-z
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/unarj241.tar.Z
unarj for Mac
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/util/compression/unarjmac.cpt.hqx
unarj for Amiga
ftp.funet.fi:pub/amiga/utilities/archivers/unarj-0.5.lha
base64 (MIME encoding): This is *not* a compression issue but it keeps
coming as a question on comp.compression. So:
ftp://ftp.andrew.cmu.edu/pub/mpack/mpack-1.5-src.tar.Z (source)
ftp://ftp.andrew.cmu.edu/pub/mpack/mpack15d.zip (MSDOS exe)
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/systems/mac/info-mac/cmp/mpack-15.hqx (Mac)
.bck: VMS BACKUP. BACKUP is *not* a compression program. Do "help backup".
.cpt: Compact Pro for Mac and Power PC
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/systems/mac/info-mac/cmp/compact-pro-151.hqx
For Unix:
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/unix/macutil-20b1.shar
ftp://ftp.cwi.nl/pub/dik/macutil2.0b3.shar.Z
For DOS:
ftp://ftp.scruz.net/users/aladdin/public/SITEX10.EXE
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/ext-pc.zip
.ddi: files made by DiskDupe (Pro)
ftp://ftp.tem.nctu.edu.tw/Msdos/arcutil/unddi11u.zip
ftp://ftp.tem.nctu.edu.tw/Msdos/arcutil/x2file15.zip
.exe: self-extracting MSDOS executable (creates files on disk when run)
Run the file, or try unzip, lha or arj on it.
.exe: compressed MSDOS executable (decompresses itself in memory then runs
the decompressed code). To get the original uncompressed .exe:
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/execomp/unp411.zip
To create such files:
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/execomp/lzexe91e.zip
ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/msdos/windows/util/winlite1.zip (for Windows)
.gif: gif files are images compressed with the LZW algorithm. See the
comp.graphics FAQ list for programs manipulating .gif files. See
suffix .Z below for source of LZW.
.gz, .z: gzip (or pack, see .z below). gzip uses the same algorithm as
zip 2.0x (see below); it can also extract packed and compressed files.
Contact: Jean-loup Gailly <gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu>
http://www.teaser.fr/~jlgailly/
For Unix, MSDOS, OS/2, VMS, Atari, Amiga, Primos:
ftp://prep.ai.mit.edu/pub/gnu/gzip-1.2.4.tar (.shar or .tar.gz: source)
ftp://prep.ai.mit.edu/pub/gnu/gzip-1.2.4.msdos.exe (MSDOS self-extract)
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/compress/gzip124.zip (MSDOS)
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/gzip-1.2.4.tar.Z (source)
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/gzip124.zip (MSDOS exe)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/WIN32/gzip124xN.zip (WIN95 & NT)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/VMS/gzip124x.vax_exe (VMS exe)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/UNIX/SUN/gzip124x.tar.Z (Solaris 2)
ftp://quest.jpl.nasa.gov/beta/vmcms_mvs/gzip123-mvs.exe (MVS)
For Mac:
ftp://ivo.cps.unizar.es//Graficos/Public/SPDsoft/MacGzip_FAT_1.0.cpt.hqx
http://persephone.cps.unizar.es/general/gente/spd/gzip/ (MacGzip page)
.ha: ha 0.99 (improved PPMC - 4th order Markov modeling)
Contact: Harri Hirvola <harri.hirvola@vaisala.infonet.com>
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/ha098.zip
ftp://ftp.nl.net/gopher/NLnet-connected/aipnl/ha0999.exe
ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/utils/compress/ha0999p-linux.tar.gz
.hap: Hamarsoft HAP archiver (Markov modeling + arithmetic coding)
Contact: feldmann@xs4all.nl or feldmann@pi.net
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/hap305bp.com
http://www.xs4all.nl/~feldmann
.hpk: hpack (archiver with strong encryption)
Contact: Peter Gutmann <pgut1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz>
ftp://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/computing/archiving/compress/hpack/
.hqx: Macintosh BinHex format.. (BinHex is *not* a compression program,
it is similar to uuencode but handles multiple forks.)
for Mac:
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/utilities/compressionapps/binhex4.0.bin
for Unix:
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/cmp/mcvert-216.shar
for MSDOS:
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/mac/xbin23.zip
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/xbin23.zip
.jam: JAM real-time compressor for MSDOS
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/jam125sw.zip
.lha:
.lzh: lha for MSDOS (LZ77 with a trie data structure, plus secondary static
Huffman coding on a block basis)
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/lha255e.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/lha255b.exe
lharc for Unix. (LZ77 with hash table and binary trees, plus secondary
Huffman coding)
Warning: lharc can extract .lzh files created by
lharc 1.xx but not those created by lha. See lha for Unix below.
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/misc/unix/lharc102a.tar-z
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/lha101u.tar.Z
lharc for VMS. Same warning as for Unix lharc.
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/packages/compression/vax-vms/lharc.exe
lha for Unix. Warning: all doc is in Japanese.
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/misc/unix/lha101u.tar-z
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/lha-1.00.tar.Z
Contact: lha-admin@oki.co.jp or oki@fs.telcom.oki.ac.jp
lha for Mac
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/utilities/compressionapps/maclha2.0.cpt.hqx
lha for Amiga
ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/amiga/utilities/archivers/LhA_e138.run
lha for OS/2:
ftp://hobbes.nmsu.edu/os2/16bit/archiver/lh2_222.zip
MIME: see base64 above
.pak: pak for MSDOS (LZW algorithm)
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/pak251.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/pak251.exe
.pit: PackIt (Macintosh)
for Mac:
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/cmp/stuffit-lite-35.hqx
for Unix:
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/cmp/mcvert-215.shar.gz
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/mac/arcers/mcvert-215.shar
.pp: PowerPacker (Amiga)
ftp.funet.fi:pub/amiga/fish/501-600/ff561/PPLib.lha
.rar: RAR (MSDOS) Contact: Eugene_Roshal@p0.f23.n5010.z2.fidonet.org
or Andrey Spasibozhko <as@hq.icb.chel.su>
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/rar200.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/rar200.exe
ftp://ftp.kiae.su/msdos/arcers/rar*.exe
ftp://ftp.elf.stuba.sk/pub/pc/pack/*rar2*.exe
.sea: self-extracting archive (Macintosh)
Run the file to extract it. The self-extraction code can be
removed with:
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/utilities/compressionapps/desea1.11.cpt.hqx
ftp://ftp.scruz.net/users/aladdin/public/SITEX10.EXE (MS Windows)
.sdn: used by the Shareware Distribution Network.
Try the decompressors for .pak or .arj (see above)
.shar: Shell archive. This is not a compression program. Use "sh foo.shar"
to extract on Unix. For MSDOS, use:
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/unshar.zip
.sit: Stuffit for Macintosh
for Mac:
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/cmp/stuffit-lite-35.hqx
for Unix:
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/cmp/unsit-15-unix.shar
for Amiga:
ftp.funet.fi:pub/amiga/utilities/archivers/unsit-1.5c2.lha
for MSDOS:
ftp://ftp.scruz.net/users/aladdin/public/SITEX10.EXE
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/unsit30.zip
.?q?: Squeeze for MSDOS (do not confuse with other 'squeeze' below).
Static Huffman coding.
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/starter/sqpc12a.com (squeeze)
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/starter/nusq110.com (unsqueeze)
.sqz: Squeeze for MSDOS (do not confuse with other 'squeeze' above)
LZ77 with hashing.
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/sqz1083e.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/sqz1083e.exe
.tar: tar is *not* a compression program. However, to be kind for you:
for MSDOS
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/starter/tarread.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/tar4dos.zoo
for Unix
tar (you have it already. To extract: tar xvf file.tar)
for VMS
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/packages/compression/vax-vms/tar.exe
for Macintosh
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/util/tar-30.hqx
for Amiga:
ftp.funet.fi:pub/amiga/fish/401-500/ff445/Tar.lha
.tar.Z, .tar-z, .taz: tar + compress
For Unix: zcat file.tar.Z | tar xvf -
with GNU tar: tar xvzf file.tar.Z
for MSDOS:
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/tar320g.zip (MSDOS exe)
ftp://ftp.kiae.su/msdos/arcers/tar*sr.zip (sources)
ftp://ftp.kiae.su/msdos/arcers/tar*_p.zip (MSDOS exe)
Other OS: first uncompress (see .Z below) then untar (see .tar above)
.tar.gz, .tgz, .tar-gz, .tar.z: tar + gzip
For Unix: gzip -cd file.tar.gz | tar xvf -
with GNU tar: tar xvzf file.tar.gz
for MSDOS: ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/tar320g.zip
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/tar320g.zip
Other OS: first uncompress (see .gz above) then untar (see .tar above)
.td0: (compressed MS-DOS floppy image produced by TeleDisk)
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/diskutil/teled212.zip
.uc2: UC2 for MSDOS and OS/2. (LZ77 with secondary static Huffman encoding on
a block basis, and dynamic dictionaries shared among files.)
Contact: desk@aip.nl
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/uc2r3.exe (or uc2pro.exe)
.z: pack or gzip (see .gz above). pack uses static Huffman coding.
To extract, see .gz above.
.zip: pkzip 2.04g for MSDOS. (LZ77 with hashing, plus secondary static
Huffman coding on a block basis). Contact: support@pkware.com
or http://www.pkware.com/
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/zip/pkz204g.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/pkz204g.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/windows/util/pkzws201.exe (Windows version)
arcutil 2.0 for VM/CMS (unzip only, not yet compatible with pkzip 2.04)
ftp://vmd.cso.uiuc.edu/public.477/arcutil.*
zip 1.1 for Unix, MSDOS, VMS, OS/2, ... (compatible with pkzip 1.10.
For corresponding unzip, see unzip 5.12 below).
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/zip11.zip
zip 2.1 and unzip 5.20 for Unix, MSDOS, VMS, OS/2, Amiga, ...
Compatible with pkzip 2.04g (LZ77 with hashing, plus secondary static
Huffman coding on a block basis). Contact: zip-bugs@lists.wku.edu
See also http://quest.jpl.nasa.gov/Info-ZIP/
(On SGI, do not confuse with the editor also named 'zip'.)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/zip21.zip (source)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/unzip52.* (source)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/MSDOS/zip21x.zip (MSDOS exe)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/MSDOS/unz520x*.exe (MSDOS exe)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/WIN32/zip21xN.zip (Win95 & NT)
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/WIN32/unz520xN.exe (Win95 & NT)
[The Win95 version supports long file names; MSDOS version doesn't]
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/OS2/* (OS/2 exe 16&32 bit)
See also AMIGA, ATARI, MAC, UNIX, RISCOS, VMS... subdirectories.
If ftp.uu.net not available, use ftp://nic.switch.ch/mirror/Info-Zip/
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/zcrypt26.zip (encryption source)
Non US residents must get the crypt versions from nic.switch.ch
for Macintosh:
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/util/compression/unzip2.01.cpt.hqx
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/util/compression/zipit1.31.cpt.hqx
ftp://ftp.uu.net/pub/archiving/zip/MAC/unz512x.hqx
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/systems/mac/info-mac/cmp/stuffit-expander-352.hqx
WinZip by Nico Mak <support@winzip.com> (uses Info-ZIP compress. code):
ftp://ftp.winzip.com/winzip/ (MS Windows)
.zoo: zoo 2.10 for MSDOS (algorithm copied from that of lha, see lha above)
Contact: Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@cirrus.com>
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/msdos/zoo/zoo210.exe
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/zoo210.exe
zoo 2.10 for Unix, VMS
ftp://oak.oakland.edu/pub/misc/unix/zoo210.tar.Z
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/zoo210.tar.Z
zoo for Mac
ftp://mac.archive.umich.edu/mac/utilities/compressionapps/maczoo.sit.hqx
zoo for Amiga
ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/amiga/utilities/archivers/Zoo-2.1.lha
.??_: Microsoft compress.exe and expand.exe. compress.exe is available
in the Windows SDK (Software Development Kit) and in
ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/softlib/mslfiles/CP0982.EXE
.F: freeze for Unix (LZ77 with hashing, plus secondary dynamic Huffman
encoding)
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/usenet/comp.sources.misc/volume35/freeze/part0[1-3].Z
ftp://ftp.inria.fr/system/arch-compr/freeze-2.5.tar.Z
Contact: Leonid A. Broukhis <leo@zycad.com>
.Y: yabba for Unix, VMS, ... (Y coding, a variant of LZ78)
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/usenet/comp.sources.unix/volume24/yabbawhap/part*.Z
ftp://ftp.inria.fr/system/arch-compr/yabba.tar.Z
Contact: Dan Bernstein <djb@silverton.berkeley.edu>
.Z: compress for Unix ('the' LZW algorithm)
It is likely that your Unix system has 'compress' already. Otherwise:
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/packages/compression/compress-4.1.tar
(not in .Z format to avoid chicken and egg problem)
compress for MSDOS
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/compress/comp430d.zip
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/unix/comp430d.zip
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/source/comp430s.zip
compress for Macintosh
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/systems/mac/info-mac/cmp/stuffit-expander-352.hqx
ftp://sumex-aim.stanford.edu/info-mac/cmp/maccompress-32.hqx
compress for Amiga
ftp.funet.fi:pub/amiga/utilities/archivers/compress-4.1.lha
compress for VAX/VMS
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/packages/compression/vax-vms/lzcomp.exe
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/packages/compression/vax-vms/lzdcmp.exe
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [3] What is the latest PKZIP version?
The latest official DOS version is 2.04g. Release 2.04c had serious bugs,
corrected in 2.04e and 2.04g. The latest Windows version is pkzws201.exe.
Be warned that there are countless bogus PKZIP 1.20, 2.0, 2.02, 3.00B,
3.05, 4.1 and whatever scams floating around. They usually are hacks
of PKZIP 1.93A beta test version. Some of them are trojans and / or
carry computer virii.
Note about pkzip 2.06 from a PKware employee:
Version 2.06 was released as an INTERNAL use only IBM version.
It is identical to 2.04G, but it has IBM names in the help
screens and such. That release is meant for IBM only.
If pkunzip indicates that you need version 2.8 to extract an
archive, your archive has been corrupted by a transfer not
made in binary mode (see item 30 below).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [4] What is an archiver?
There is a distinction between archivers and other compression
programs:
- an archiver takes several input files, compresses them and produces
a single archive file. Examples are arc, arj, lha, zip, zoo.
- other compression programs create one compressed file for each
input file. Examples are freeze, yabba, compress, gzip. Such programs
are often combined with tar to create compressed archives (see
question 50: "What is this tar compression program?").
For a comparison of zip and gzip, see the gzip README file. (In short:
zip is an archiver, gzip is not; only zip is compatible with pkzip.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [5] What is the best general purpose compression program?
The answer is: it depends. (You did not expect a definitive answer,
did you?)
It depends whether you favor speed, compression ratio, a standard and
widely used archive format, the number of features, etc... Just as
for text editors, personal taste plays an important role. compress has
4 options, arj 2.30 has about 130 options; different people like
different programs. *Please* do not start or continue flame wars on
such matters of taste.
Several benchmarks of MSDOS archivers are available:
- ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/actest*.zip
and http://www.mi.net/act/act.html by Jeff Gilchrist <jeffg@mi.net>
- ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/act-*.zip
by Jonathan Burt <jonathan@jaburt.demon.co.uk>
Please do not post your own benchmarks made on your own files that
nobody else can access. If you think that you must absolutely post yet
another benchmark, make sure that your test files are available by
anonymous ftp.
Since all other benchmarks are for MSDOS only, here is one mainly for
Unix, on a 33Mhz Compaq 386. All programs have been run on Unix SVR4,
except pkzip and arj which only run on MSDOS.
The programs compared here were chosen because they are the most
popular or because they run on Unix and source is available. For ftp
information, see above. Three programs (hpack, comp-2 and ha) have
been added because they achieve better compression (at the expense of
speed) and one program (lzrw3-a) has been added because it favors
speed at the expense of compression:
- comp-2 is in ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/mirrors/msdos/ddjmag/ddj9102.zip
(inner zip file nelson.zip),
- hpack is in ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/unix/arcers/hpack78src.tar.Z
- ha 0.98 is in ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/arcers/ha098.zip
- lzrw3-a is in http://wwwvms.utexas.edu/~cbloom/src/lzrw.zip
The 14 files used in the comparison are from the standard Calgary
Text Compression Corpus, available in
ftp://ftp.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/pub/projects/text.compression.corpus/
The whole corpus includes 18 files, but the 4 files paper[3-6] are
generally omitted in benchmarks. It contains several kinds of file
(ascii, binary, image, etc...) but has a bias towards large files.
You may well get different ratings on the typical mix of files that
you use daily, so keep in mind that the comparisons given below are
only indicative.
The programs are ordered by decreasing total compressed size. For a
fair comparison between archivers and other programs, this size is
only the size of the compressed data, not the archive size.
The programs were run on an idle machine, so the elapsed time
is significant and can be used to compare Unix and MSDOS programs.
[Note: I did not have time to run again all benchmarks with more
recent versions of zip, freeze, arj, hpack and ha. To be done for some
future revision of this FAQ.]
size lzrw3a compress lharc yabba pkzip freeze
version: 4.0 1.02 1.0 1.10 2.3.5
options: -m300000
------ ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
bib 111261 49040 46528 46502 40456 41354 41515
book1 768771 416131 332056 369479 306813 350560 344793
book2 610856 274371 250759 252540 229851 232589 230861
geo 102400 84214 77777 70955 76695 76172 68626
news 377109 191291 182121 166048 168287 157326 155783
obj1 21504 12647 14048 10748 13859 10546 10453
obj2 246814 108040 128659 90848 114323 90130 85500
paper1 53161 24522 25077 21748 22453 20041 20021
paper2 82199 39479 36161 35275 32733 32867 32693
pic 513216 111000 62215 61394 65377 63805 53291
progc 39611 17919 19143 15399 17064 14164 14143
progl 71646 24358 27148 18760 23512 17255 17064
progp 49379 16801 19209 12792 16617 11877 11686
trans 93695 30292 38240 28092 31300 23135 22861
3,141,622 1,400,105 1,259,141 1,200,580 1,159,340 1,141,821 1,109,290
real 0m35s 0m59s 5m03s 2m40s 5m27s
user 0m25s 0m29s 4m29s 1m46s 4m58s
sys 0m05s 0m10s 0m07s 0m18s 0m08s
MSDOS: 1m39s
zoo lha arj pkzip zip hpack comp-2 ha
2.10 1.0(Unix) 2.30 2.04g 1.9 0.75a 0.98
ah 2.13(MSDOS) -jm -ex -6 a2
------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------
bib 40742 40740 36090 35126 34950 35619 29840 26927
book1 339076 339074 318382 312490 312619 306876 237380 235733
book2 228444 228442 210521 206513 206306 208486 174085 163535
geo 68576 68574 69209 68706 68418 58976 64590 59356
news 155086 155084 146855 144545 144395 141608 128047 123335
obj1 10312 10310 10333 10306 10295 10572 10819 9799
obj2 84983 84981 82052 81132 81336 80806 85465 80381
paper1 19678 19676 18710 18531 18525 18607 16895 15675
paper2 32098 32096 30034 29568 29674 29825 25453 23956
pic 52223 52221 53578 52409 55051 51778 55461 51639
progc 13943 13941 13408 13341 13238 13475 12896 11795
progl 16916 16914 16408 16122 16175 16586 17354 15298
progp 11509 11507 11308 11200 11182 11647 11668 10498
trans 22580 22578 20046 19462 18879 20506 21023 17927
1,096,166 1,096,138 1,036,934 1,019,451 1,021,043 1,005,367 890,976 845,854
real 4m07s 6m03s 1m49s 1h22m17s 27m05s
user 3m47s 4m23s 1m43s 1h20m46s 19m27s
sys 0m04s 0m08s 0m02s 0m12s 2m03s
MSDOS: 1m49s 2m41s 1m43s 14m43s
Notes:
- the compressed data for 'zoo ah' is always two bytes longer than for
lha. This is simply because both programs are derived from the same
source (ar002, written by Haruhiko Okumura, available by ftp in
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/arcers/ar002.zip).
- hpack 0.75a gives slightly different results on SunOS. (To be checked
with latest version of hpack).
- the MSDOS versions are all optimized with assembler code and were run
on a RAM disk. So it is not surprising that they often go faster than
their Unix equivalent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [7] Which books should I read?
[BWC 1989] Bell, T.C, Cleary, J.G. and Witten, I.H, "Text Compression",
Prentice-Hall 1989. ISBN: 0-13-911991-4. Price: approx. US$60
The reference on text data compression.
[Nel 1996] Mark Nelson & Jean-loup Gailly, "The Data Compression Book",
2nd edition. M&T Books, New York, NY 1996. ISBN 1-55851-434-1
541 pages. List price in the US is $39.95 including one PC-compatible
disk bearing all the source code printed in the book.
A practical introduction to data compression.
The book is targeted at a person who is comfortable reading C code but
doesn't know anything about data compression. Its stated goal is to get
you up to the point where you are competent to program standard
compression algorithms.
[Will 1990] Williams, R. "Adaptive Data Compression", Kluwer Books, 1990.
ISBN: 0-7923-9085-7. Price: US$75.
Reviews the field of text data compression and then addresses the
problem of compressing rapidly changing data streams.
[Stor 1988] Storer, J.A. "Data Compression: Methods and Theory", Computer
Science Press, Rockville, MD. ISBN: 0-88175-161-8.
A survey of various compression techniques, mainly statistical
non-arithmetic compression and LZSS compression. Includes complete Pascal
code for a series of LZ78 variants.
[Stor 1992] Storer, J.A. "Image and Text Compression", Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1992, ISBN 0-7923-9243-4
[Say 1996] Sayood, Khalid. "Introduction to Data Compression",
San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1996. ISBN 1-55860-346-8;
US&Canada $64.95. More info in http://www.mkp.com/pages/3468/index.html
The book covers both lossy and lossless compression techniques and their
applications to image, speech, text, audio, and video compression.
[BK 95] Bhaskaran V. and Konstantinides K., "Image and Video Compression
Standards: Algorithms and Architectures", Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.
ISBN 0-7923-9591-3
[ACG 1991] Advances in Speech Coding, edited by Atal, Cuperman, and Gersho,
Kluwer Academic Press, 1991.
[GG 1991] Vector Quantization and Signal Compression, by Gersho and Gray,
Kluwer Acad. Press, 1991, ISBN 0-7923-9181-0.
[CT 1991] Elements of Information Theory, by T.M.Cover and J.A.Thomas
John Wiley & Sons, 1991. ISBN 0-471-06259-6.
Review papers:
[BWC 1989] Bell, T.C, Witten, I.H, and Cleary, J.G. "Modeling for Text
Compression", ACM Computing Surveys, Vol.21, No.4 (December 1989), p.557
A good general overview of compression techniques (as well as modeling for
text compression); the condensed version of "Text Compression".
[Lele 1987] Lelewer, D.A, and Hirschberg, D.S. "Data Compression", ACM
Computing Surveys, Vol.19, No.3 (September 1987), p.261.
A survey of data compression techniques which concentrates on Huffman
compression and makes only passing mention of other techniques.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [8] What about patents on data compression algorithms?
[Note: the appropriate group for discussing software patents is
comp.patents or misc.legal.computing, not comp.compression.]
Only a very small subset of all patents on data compression are mentioned
here; there are several hundred patents on lossless data compression alone.
All patents mentioned here are US patents, and thus probably not applicable
outside the US. See item 70, "Introduction to data compression" for the
meaning of LZ77, LZ78 or LZW.
(a) Run length encoding
- Tsukiyama has two patents on run length encoding: 4,586,027 and 4,872,009
granted in 1986 and 1989 respectively. The first one covers run length
encoding in its most primitive form: a length byte followed by the
repeated byte. The second patent covers the 'invention' of limiting the
run length to 16 bytes and thus the encoding of the length on 4 bits.
Here is the start of claim 1 of patent 4,872,009, just for pleasure:
1. A method of transforming an input data string comprising a plurality
of data bytes, said plurality including portions of a plurality of
consecutive data bytes identical to one another, wherein said data
bytes may be of a plurality of types, each type representing different
information, said method comprising the steps of: [...]
- O'Brien has patented (4,988,998) run length encoding followed by LZ77.
(b) LZ77
- Waterworth patented (4,701,745) the algorithm now known as LZRW1,
because Ross Williams reinvented it later and posted it on
comp.compression on April 22, 1991. (See item 5 for the ftp site
with all LZRW derivatives.) The *same* algorithm has later been
patented by Gibson & Graybill (see below). The patent office failed
to recognize that the same algorithm was patented twice, even though
the wording used in the two patents is very similar.
The Waterworth patent is now owned by Stac Inc, which won a lawsuit
against Microsoft, concerning the compression feature of MSDOS 6.0.
Damages awarded were $120 million. (Microsoft and Stac later
settled out of court.)
- Fiala and Greene obtained in 1990 a patent (4,906,991) on all
implementations of LZ77 using a tree data structure. Claim 1 of the
patent is much broader than the algorithms published by Fiala and
Greene in Comm.ACM, April 89. The patent covers the algorithm
published by Rodeh and Pratt in 1981 (J. of the ACM, vol 28, no 1,
pp 16-24). It also covers the algorithms used in lharc, lha and zoo.
- Notenboom (from Microsoft) 4,955,066 uses three levels of
compression, starting with run length encoding.
- The Gibson & Graybill patent 5,049,881 covers the LZRW1 algorithm
previously patented by Waterworth and reinvented by Ross Williams.
Claims 4 and 12 are very general and could be interpreted as
applying to any LZ algorithm using hashing (including all variants
of LZ78):
4. A compression method for compressing a stream of input data into
a compressed stream of output data based on a minimum number of
characters in each input data string to be compressed, said
compression method comprising the creation of a hash table, hashing
each occurrence of a string of input data and subsequently searching
for identical strings of input data and if such an identical string
of input data is located whose string size is at least equal to the
minimum compression size selected, compressing the second and all
subsequent occurrences of such identical string of data, if a string
of data is located which does not match to a previously compressed
string of data, storing such data as uncompressed data, and for each
input strings after each hash is used to find a possible previous
match location of the string, the location of the string is stored
in the hash table, thereby using the previously processed data to
act as a compression dictionary.
Claim 12 is identical, with 'method' replaced with 'apparatus'. Since
the 'minimal compression size' can be as small as 2, the claim could
cover any dictionary technique of the LZ family. However the text of the
patent and the other claims make clear that the patent should cover the
LZRW1 algorithm only. (In any case the Gibson & Graybill patent is likely
to be invalid because of the prior art in the Waterworth patent.)
- Phil Katz, author of pkzip, also has a patent on LZ77 (5,051,745)
but the claims only apply to sorted hash tables, and when the hash
table is substantially smaller than the window size.
- IBM patented (5,001,478) the idea of combining a history buffer (the
LZ77 technique) and a lexicon (as in LZ78).
- Stac Inc patented (5,016,009 and 5,126,739) yet another variation of LZ77
with hashing. The '009 patent was used in the lawsuit against Microsoft
(see above). Stac also has a patent on LZ77 with parallel lookup in
hardware (5,003,307).
- Robert Jung, author of 'arj', has been granted patent 5,140,321
for one variation of LZ77 with hashing. This patent covers the LZRW3-A
algorithm, also previously discovered by Ross Williams. LZRW3-A was posted
on comp.compression on July 15, 1991. The patent was filed two months later
on Sept 4, 1991. (The US patent system allows this because of the
'invention date' rule.)
- Chambers 5,155,484 is yet another variation of LZ77 with hashing.
The hash function is just the juxtaposition of two input bytes,
this is the 'invention' being patented. The hash table is named
'direct lookup table'.
(c) LZ78
- One form of the original LZ78 algorithm was patented (4,464,650) by
its authors Lempel, Ziv, Cohn and Eastman. This patent is owned
by Unisys.
- The LZW algorithm used in 'compress' is patented by IBM (4,814,746)
and Unisys (4,558,302). It is also used in the V.42bis compression
standard (see question 11 on V.42bis below), in Postscript Level 2, in
GIF and TIFF. Unisys sells the license to modem manufacturers for a
onetime fee (contact: Welch Patent Desk, Unisys Corp., P.O. Box 500,
Bluebell, PA 19424 Mailcode C SW 19). CompuServe is licensing the
usage of LZW in GIF products for 1.5% of the product price, of which
1% goes to Unisys; usage of LZW in non-GIF products must be licensed
directly from Unisys. For more information, see http://www.unisys.com/
or email to lzw_info@unisys.com.
The IBM patent application was first filed three weeks before that of
Unisys, but the US patent office failed to recognize that they
covered the same algorithm. (The IBM patent is more general, but its
claim 7 is exactly LZW.)
- Klaus Holtz also claims that patent 4,366,551 for his "autosophy"
data compression method covers LZ78 and LZW. According to Holtz, most of
the largest V.42bis modem manufacturers have paid for patent licenses.
- AP coding is patented by Storer (4,876,541). (Get the yabba package
for source code, see question 2 above, file type .Y) Storer also
claims that his patent covers V.42bis.
(d) arithmetic coding
- IBM holds many patents on arithmetic coding (4,122,440 4,286,256 4,295,125
4,463,342 4,467,317 4,633,490 4,652,856 4,792,954 4,891,643 4,901,363
4,905,297 4,933,883 4,935,882 5,045,852 5,142,283 5,210,536 5,414,423). It
has patented in particular the Q-coder implementation of arithmetic coding.
The JBIG standard, and the arithmetic coding option of the JPEG standard
requires use of the patented algorithm. No JPEG-compatible method is
possible without infringing the patent, because what IBM actually claims
rights to is the underlying probability model (the heart of an arithmetic
coder). (See item 75 for details.)
See also below details on many other patents on arithmetic coding (4,973,961
4,989,000 5,023,611 5,025,258 5,099,440 5,272,478 5,307,062 5,309,381
5,311,177 5,363,099 5,404,140 5,406,282 5,418,532 5,546,080). The list is not
exhaustive.
(e) predictor
- The 'predictor' algorithm was first described in the paper
Raita, T. and Teuhola, J. (1987), "Predictive text compression by hashing",
ACM Conference on Information Retrieval
This algorithm has been patented (5,229,768) by K. Thomas in 1993. It
is used in the Internet Draft "PPP Predictor Compression Protocol" (see
ftp://venera.isi.edu/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-predictor-00.txt).
(f) compression of random data
- The US patent office no longer grants patents on perpetual motion machines,
but has recently granted a patent on a mathematically impossible process
(compression of truly random data): 5,533,051 "Method for Data Compression".
See item 9.5 of this FAQ for details.
As can be seen from the above list, some of the most popular compression
programs (compress, pkzip, zoo, lha, arj) are now covered by patents.
(This says nothing about the validity of these patents.)
Here are some references on data compression patents. Some of them are
taken from the list ftp://prep.ai.mit.edu/pub/lpf/patent-list.
3,914,586
Data compression method and apparatus
filed 10/25/73, granted 10/21/75
General Motors Corporation, Detroit MI
Duane E. McIntosh, Santa Ynez CA
Data compression apparatus is disclosed is operable in either a bit
pair coding mode of a word coding mode depending on the degree of
redundancy of the data to be encoded.
3,976,844
Data communication system for transmitting data in compressed form
filed Apr. 4, 1975, granted Aug. 24, 1976
inventor Bernard K. Betz, assignee Honeywell Information Systems, Inc.
[encode differences with previous line]
4,021,782
Data compaction system and apparatus
inventor Hoerning
filed 04/30/1975, granted 05/03/1977
[A primitive form of LZ77 with implicit offsets (compare with previous record)]
4,054,951
Data expansion apparatus
inventor R.D. Jackson, assignee IBM
filed Jun. 30, 1976, granted Oct. 18, 1977
[Covers only decompression of data compressed with a variant of LZ77.]
4,087,788
Data compression system
filed 1/14/77, granted 5/2/78
NCR Canada LTD - NCR Canada Ltee, Mississauga CA
Brian J. Johannesson, Waterloo CA
A data compression system is disclosed in which the left hand boundary
of a character is developed in the form of a sequence of Freeman
direction codes, the codes being stored in digital form within a
processor.
4,122,440
Method and means for arithmetic string coding
assignee IBM
filed 1977/03/04, granted 1978/10/24
[This is the basic idea of arithmetic coding. Note that the patent is
expired now.]
4,286,256
Method and means for arithmetic coding using a reduced number of operations.
granted Aug 25, 1981
assignee IBM
4,295,125
A method and means for pipeline decoding of the high to low order pairwise
combined digits of a decodable set of relatively shifted finite number of
strings
granted Oct 13, 1981
assignee IBM
4,366,551
Associative Memory Search System
filed June 16, 1975, granted Dec. 28, 1982.
inventor Klaus Holtz, assignee Omni Dimensional Networks.
4,412,306
System for minimizing space requirements for storage and transmission of
digital signals
filed May 14, 1981, granted Oct. 25, 1983
inventor Edward W. Moll
4,463,342
A method and means for carry-over control in a high order to low order
combining of digits of a decodable set of relatively shifted finite number
strings.
granted Jul 31, 1984
assignee IBM
4,491,934
Data compression process
filed May 12, 1982, granted Jan. 1, 1985
inventor Karl E. Heinz
4,464,650
Apparatus and method for compressing data signals and restoring the
compressed data signals
inventors Lempel, Ziv, Cohn, Eastman
assignee Sperry Corporation (now Unisys)
filed 8/10/81, granted 8/7/84
A compressor parses the input data stream into segments where each
segment comprises a prefix and the next symbol in the data stream
following the prefix. [This is the original LZ78 algorithm.]
4,467,317
High-speed arithmetic compression using using concurrent value updating.
granted Aug 21, 1984
assignee IBM
4,494,108
Adaptive source modeling for data file compression within bounded memory
filed Jun. 5, 1984, granted Jan. 15, 1985
invntors Glen G. Langdon, Jorma J. Rissanen
assignee IBM
order 1 Markov modeling
4,558,302
High speed data compression and decompression apparatus and method
inventor Welch
assignee Sperry Corporation (now Unisys)
filed 6/20/83, granted 12/10/85
re-examined: filed 12/14/92, granted 4/1/94.
The text for the original patent can be ftped from ftp.uni-stuttgart.de
in /pub/doc/comp-patents/US4558302.Z.
There is also a European Patent 0,129,439 1/2/89 for DE, FR, GB, IT
and patent pending for Japan.
4,560,976
Data compression
filed 6/5/84, granted 12/24/85
Codex Corporation, Mansfield MA
Steven G. Finn, Framingham, MA
A stream of source characters, which occur with varying relative
frequencies, is encoded into a compressed stream of codewords, each
having one, two or three subwords, by ranking the source characters by
their current frequency of appearance, encoding the source characters
having ranks no higher than a first number as one subword codewords,
source characters having ranks higher than the first number but no
higher than a second number as two subword codewords, and the
remaining source characters as three subword codewords.
4,586,027
Method and system for data compression and restoration
inventor Tsukimaya et al.
assignee Hitachi
filed 08/07/84, granted 04/29/86
patents run length encoding
4,597,057
System for compressed storate of 8-bit ascii bytes using coded strings
of 4-bit nibbles.
inventor Snow, assignee System Development corporation.
filed 12/31/1981, granted 06/24/1986.
Compression using static dictionary of common words, prefixes and suffixes.
4,612,532
Data compression apparatus and method
inventor Bacon, assignee Telebyte Corportion
filed Jun. 19, 1984, granted Sep. 16, 1986
[Uses followsets as in the pkzip 0.92 'reduce' algorithm, but the
followsets are dynamically updated. This is in effect a sort of order-1
Markov modeling.]
4,622,545
Method and apparatus for image compression and Manipulation
inventor William D. Atkinson
assignee Apple computer Inc.
filed 9/30/82
granted 11/11/86
4,633,490
Symmetrical adaptive data compression/decompression system.
granted Dec 30, 1985
assignee IBM
4,652,856
A multiplication-free multi-alphabet arithmetic code.
granted Feb 4, 1986
assignee IBM
4,667,649
Data receiving apparatus
filed 4/18/84, granted 6/30/87
inventors Kunishi et al.
assignee Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, Tokyo Japan
compression of Fax images.
4,682,150
Data compression method and apparatus
inventors Mathes and Protheroe,
assignee NCR Corporation, Dayton OH
A system and apparatus for compressing redundant and nonredundant
binary data generated as part of an operation of a time and attendance
terminal in which the data represents the time an employee is present
during working hours.
4,701,745
Data compression system
inventor Waterworth John R
assignee Ferranti PLC GB, patent rights now acquired by Stac Inc.
filed 03/03/1986 (03/06/1985 in GB), granted 10/20/1987
Algorithm now known as LZRW1 (see above)
I claim:
1. A data compression system comprising an input store for receiving
and storing a plurality of bytes of uncompressed data from an outside
source, and data processing means for processing successive bytes of
data from the input store;
the data processing means including circuit means operable to check
whether a sequence of successive bytes to be processed identical with
a sequence of bytes already processed, and including hash generating
means responsive to the application of a predetermined number of
bytes in sequence to derive a hash code appropriate to those bytes, a
temporary store in which the hash code may represent the address of a
storage location, and a pointer counter operable to store in the
temporary store at said address a pointer indicative of the position
in the input store of one of the predetermined number of bytes;
output means operable to apply to a transfer medium each byte of data
not forming part of such an identical sequence; and
encoding means responsive to the identification of such a sequence to
apply to the transfer medium an identification signal which identifies
both the location in the input store of the previous occurrence of the
sequence of bytes and the number of bytes contained in the sequence.
4,730,348
Adaptive data compression system
inventor MacCrisken, assignee Adaptive Computer Technologies
filed Sep. 19, 1986, granted Mar. 8, 1988
[order-1 Markov modeling + Huffman coding + LZ77]
4,758,899
Data compression control device
inventor Tsukiyama, assignee Hitachi
filed 11/20/1985, granted 07/19/1988
Limits compression to ensure that tape drive stays busy.
4,792,954
Concurrent detection of errors in arithmetic data compression coding
assignee IBM
filed 1986/10/31, granted 1988/12/20
4,809,350
Data compression system
filed Jan. 30, 1987, granted Feb. 28, 1989
inventor Yair Shimoni & Ron Niv
assignee Elscint Ltd., Haifa, Israel
[Image compression via variable length encoding of differences with
predicted data.]
4,814,746
Data compression method
inventors Victor S. Miller, Mark N. Wegman
assignee IBM
filed 8/11/86, granted 3/21/89
A previous application was filed on 6/1/83, three weeks before the
application by Welch (4,558,302)
Communications between a Host Computing System and a number of remote
terminals is enhanced by a data compression method which modifies the
data compression method of Lempel and Ziv by addition of new character
and new string extensions to improve the compression ratio, and
deletion of a least recently used routine to limit the encoding tables
to a fixed size to significantly improve data transmission efficiency.
4,841,092
continued in 5,003,307
4,853,696
Code converter for data compression/decompression
filed 4/13/87, granted 8/1/89
inventor Amar Mukherjee, Maitland FL
assignee University of Central Florida, Orlando FL
Another hardware Huffman encoder:
A code converter has a network of logic circuits connected in reverse
binary tree fashion with logic paths between leaf nodes and a common
root node.
4,872,009
Method and apparatus for data compression and restoration
inventor Tsukimaya et al.
assignee Hitachi
filed 12/07/87, granted 10/03/89
This patent on run length encoding covers the 'invention' of limiting
the run length to 16 bytes and thus the encoding of the length on 4 bits.
4,876,541
Stem [sic] for dynamically compressing and decompressing electronic data
filed 10/15/87, granted 10/24/89
inventor James A. Storer
assignee Data Compression Corporation
A data compression system for encoding and decoding textual data,
including an encoder for encoding the data and for a decoder for
decoding the encoded data.
4,891,643
Arithmetic coding data compression/de-compression by selectively
employed, diverse arithmetic encoders and decoders.
granted Jan 2, 1990
assignee IBM
4,901,363
System for compressing bi-level data
assignee IBM
[arithmetic coding]
4,905,297
Arithmetic coding encoder and decoder system.
granted Feb 27, 1990
assignee IBM
4,906,991
Textual substitution data compression with finite length search window
filed 4/29/1988, granted 3/6/1990
inventors Fiala,E.R., and Greene,D.H.
assignee Xerox Corporation
4,933,883
Probability adaptation for arithmetic coders.
granted Jun 12, 1990
assignee IBM
4,935,882
Probability adaptation for arithmetic coders.
granted Jun 19, 1990
assignee IBM
4,941,193
Barnsley, fractal compression.
4,943,869
Compression Method for Dot Image Data
filed 1988-05-04, granted 1990-07-24
assignee Fuji Photo Film Co.
Lossy and lossless image compression schemes.
4,955,066
Compressing and Decompressing Text Files
filed 10/13/89, granted 09/04/90
inventor Notenboom, L.A.
assignee Microsoft
Now extended as 5,109,433
[Noted in signon screen of Word 5.5 and on the outside of the MS-DOS 5.0
Upgrade.]
A method of compressing a text file in digital form is disclosed.
A full text file having characters formed into phrases is provided by an
author. The characters are digitally represented by bytes. A first pass
compression is sequentially followed by a second pass compression of the
text which has previously been compressed. A third or fourth level of
compression is serially performed on the compressed text. For example, in
a first pass, the text is run-length compressed. In a second pass, the
compressed text is further compressed with key phrase compression. In a
third pass, the compressed text is further compressed with Huffman
compression. The compressed text is stored in a text file having a Huffman
decode tree, a key phrase table, and a topic index. The data is
decompressed in a single pass and provided one line at a time as an output.
Sequential compressing of the text minimizes the storage space required for
the file. Decompressing of the text is performed in a single pass. As a
complete line is decompressed, it is output rapidly, providing full text to
the user.
4,973,961
Method and apparatus for carry-over control in arithmetic coding.
granted Nov 27, 1990
assignee AT&T
4,988,998
Data compression system for successively applying at least two data
compression methods to an input data stream.
inventor O'Brien
assignee Storage Technology Corporation, Louisville, Colorado
filed Sep 5, 1989, granted Jan 29, 1991.
Run length encoding followed by LZ77.
4,989,000
Data string compression using arithmetic encoding with simplified probability
subinterval estimation
filed 1989/06/19, granted 1991/01/29]
[shift & add instead of multiply]
5,001,478
Method of Encoding Compressed Data
filed 12/28/89, granted 03/19/91
inventor Michael E. Nagy
assignee IBM
1. A method of encoding a compressed data stream made up of a sequence of
literal references, lexicon references and history references, which
comprises the steps of:
assigning to each literal reference a literal identifier;
assigning to each history reference a history identifier;
assigning to each lexicon reference a lexicon identifier;
and emitting a data stream with said identifiers assigned to said references.
Gordon Irlam <gordoni@cs.adelaide.edu.au> says:
The invention can probably be best understood by considering the
decompressor. It consists of a history buffer, and a lexicon buffer, both
of which are initially empty. The history buffer contains the last n
symbols emitted. Whenever a history buffer reference is to be output the
string so referenced is subsequently moved to the lexicon buffer for future
reference. Thus the history buffer keeps track of strings that may be
repeated on a very short term basis, while the lexicon buffer stores items
for a longer time. Furthermore a history reference involves specifying
both the offset and length within the history buffer, whereas a lexicon
reference simply specifies a number denoting the string. Both buffers have
a finite size.
5,003,307
Data compression apparatus with shift register search means
filed Oct. 6, 1989, granted Mar. 26, 1991
inventors George Glen A, Ivey Glen E, Whiting Douglas L
assignee Stac Inc
continuation of 4,841,092
5,016,009
Data compression apparatus and method
filed 01/13/1989, granted 05/14/1991
inventors George Glen A, Ivey Glen E, Whiting Douglas L
assignee Stac Inc
LZ77 with offset hash table (extended in 5,126,739)
5,023,611
Entropy encoder/decoder including a context extractor.
granted Jun 11, 1991
assignee AT&T
5,025,258
Adaptive probability estimator for entropy encoder/decoder.
granted Jun 18, 1991
assignee AT&T
5,045,852
Dynamic model selection during data compression
assignee IBM
[arithmetic coding]
5,049,881
Apparatus and method for very high data rate-compression incorporating
lossless data compression and expansion utilizing a hashing technique
inventors Dean K. Gibson, Mark D. Graybill
assignee Intersecting Concepts, Inc.
filed 6/18/90, granted 9/17/91
[covers lzrw1, almost identical with Waterworth 4,701,745]
5,051,745
String searcher, and compressor using same
filed 8/21/90, granted 9/24/91
inventor Phillip W. Katz (author of pkzip)
In the string search method and apparatus pointers to the string to be
searched are indexed via a hashing function and organized according to the
hashing values of the string elements pointed to. The hashing function is
also run on the string desired to be found, and the resulting hashing value
is used to access the index. If the resulting hashing value is not in the
index, it is known that the target string does not appear in the string
being searched. Otherwise the index is used to determine the pointers which
correspond to the target hashing value, these pointers pointing to likely
candidates for matching the target string. The pointers are then used to
sequentially compare each of the locations in the string being searched to
the target string, to determine whether each location contains a match to
the target string.
In the method and apparatus for compressing a stream of data symbols, a
fixed length search window, comprising a predetermined contiguous portion
of the symbol stream, is selected as the string to be searched by the
string searcher. If a string to be compressed is found in the symbol
stream, a code is output designating the location within the search window
of the matching string and the length of the matching string.
5,065,447 (continued in 5,347,600)
Method and apparatus for processing digital data
filed Jul. 5, 1989, granted Nov. 12, 1991
inventors Michael F. Barnsley and Alan D. Sloan
[Patents image compression with the "Fractal Transform"]
5,099,440
Probability adaptation for arithmetic coders
5,109,433
Compressing and decompressing text files
inventor Notenboom
assignee Microsoft
extension of 4,955,066
5,126,739
Data Compression Apparatus and Method
filed Nov. 27, 1990, granted June 30, 1992.
inventor Whiting et. al
assignee Stac Inc
LZ77 with offset hash table (extension of 5,016,009)
5,140,321
Data compression/decompression method and apparatus
filed 9/4/91, granted 8/18/92
inventor Robert Jung
assignee Prime Computer
5,142,283
Arithmetic compression coding using interpolation for ambiguous symbols
filed 1990/07/10, granted 1992/08/25
assignee IBM
5,155,484
Fast data compressor with direct lookup table indexing into history buffer
filed 9/13/1991, granted 10/13/1992
inventor Chambers, IV, Lloyd L., Menlo Park, California
assignee Salient Software, Inc., Palo Alto, California (02)
Uses a 64K hash table indexed by the first two characters of
the input string. Includes several claims on the LZ77 file format
(literal or pair offset,length).
5,179,378
file Jul. 30, 1991, granted Jan. 12, 1993
inventor Ranganathan
assignee University of South Florida
Method and apparatus for the compression and decompression of data
using Lempel-Ziv based techniques.
[This covers LZ77 hardware compression with a systolic array of
processors working in parallel.]
5,210,536
Data compression/coding method and device for implementing said method
assignee IBM
[PPM + arithmetic coding]
5,229,768
Adaptive data compression system
granted Jul. 20, 1993
inventor Kasman E. Thomas
assignee Traveling Software, Inc.
A system for data compression and decompression is disclosed. A series of
fixed length overlapping segments, called hash strings, are formed from an
input data sequence. A retrieved character is the next character in the input
data sequence after a particular hash string. A hash function relates a
particular hash string to a unique address in a look-up table (LUT). An
associated character for the particular hash string is stored in the LUT at
the address. When a particular hash string is considered, the content of the
LUT address associated with the hash string is checked to determine whether
the associated character matches the retrieved character following the hash
string. If there is a match, a Boolean TRUE is output; if there is no match,
a Boolean FALSE along with the retrieved character is output. Furthermore, if
there is no match, then the LUT is updated by replacing the associated
character in the LUT with the retrieved character. [...]
[This algorithm is used in the Internet draft
"PPP Predictor Compression Protocol".]
5,272,478
Method and apparatus for entropy coding
assignee Ricoh
[arithmetic coding with finite state machine]
5,307,062
Coding system
filed 1992/12/15, granted 1994/04/26
assignee Mitsubishi
[binary arithmetic coding, see also 5,404,140]
5,309,381
Probability estimation table apparatus
filed 1992/04/08, granted 1994/05/03
assignee Ricoh
[arithmetic coding]
5,311,177
Code transmitting apparatus with limited carry propagation
filed 1992/06/19, granted 1994/05/10
assignee Mitsubishi
[arithmetic coding]
5,347,600 (continuation of 5,065,447)
Method and apparatus for compression and decompression of digital image
filed 10/23/1991, granted 09/13/1994
inventors Barnsley and Sloan
5,363,099
Method and apparatus for entropy coding
[arithmetic coding with state machine]
5,384,867 (continued in 5,430,812)
filed 10/23/1991, granted 01/24/1995
Fractal transform compression board
inventors Barnsley et al.
5,404,140
Coding system
filed 1994/01/13, granted 1995/04/04
assignee Mitsubishi
[binary arithmetic coding, see also 5,307,062]
5,406,282
Data coding and decoding with improved efficiency
assignee Ricoh
[PPM & arithmedic coding]
5,414,423
Stabilization of probability estimates by conditioning on prior decisions
of a given context
assignee IBM
arithmetic coding]
5,416,856
Method of encoding a digital image using iterated image transformations
to form an eventually contractive map
filed 1992/03/30, granted 1995/05/16
inventors Jacobs, Boss and Fisher
5,418,532
Method and system for efficient, multiplication-free arithmetic coding
filed 1993/05/13, granted 1995/05/23.
inventors Lei & Shaw-Min
assignee Bell Communications Research, Inc. (Livingston, NJ).
5,430,812 (continuation of 5,384,867)
Fractal transform compression board
filed 1994/05/18, granted 1995/07/04
inventors Barnsley et al.
5,533,051
Method for Data Compression
filed 1993/03/12, granted 1996/07/02
inventor David C. James, assignee The James Group
This is a patent on compression of random data, see item 9.5 below.
Japan 2-46275
Coding system
granted Feb 26, 1990
[Patents one form of arithmetic coding.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [9] Compression of random data (WEB, Gilbert and others)
[Note from the FAQ maintainer: this topic has generated and is still generating
the greatest volume of news in the history of comp.compression. Read this
before posting on this subject.
I intended to remove the WEB story from the FAQ, but similar affairs come up
regularly on comp.compression. The advertized revolutionary methods have all
in common their supposed ability to compress random or already compressed data.
I will keep this item in the FAQ to encourage people to take such claims with
great precautions.]
9.1 Introduction
It is mathematically impossible to compress without loss truly random data (see
below and also item 73 in part 2 of this FAQ). Yet from time to time some
people claim to have invented a new algorithm for doing so. Such algorithms are
claimed to be applicable recursively, that is, applying the compressor to the
compressed output of the previous run, possibly multiple times. Fantastic
compression ratios of over 100:1 on random data are claimed to be actually
obtained.
Such claims inevitably generate a lot of activity on comp.compression, which
can last for several months. The two largest bursts of activity were generated
by WEB Technologies and by Jules Gilbert. Premier Research Corporation
(with a compressor called MINC) made only a brief appearance. The Hyper Space
method invented by David C. James is a new contender with a patent obtained
in July 96.
Other people have also claimed incredible compression ratios, but the programs
(OWS, WIC) were quickly shown to be fake (not compressing at all). This topic
is covered in item 10 of this FAQ.
9.2 The counting argument
The WEB compressor (see details in section 9.3 below) was claimed to compress
without loss *all* files of greater than 64KB in size to about 1/16th their
original length. A very simple counting argument shows that this is impossible,
regardless of the compression method. It is even impossible to guarantee
lossless compression of all files by at least one bit. (Many other proofs have
been posted on comp.compression, please do not post yet another one.)
Assume that the program can compress without loss all files of size >= N bits.
Compress with this program all the 2^N files which have exactly N bits. All
compressed files have at most N-1 bits, so there are at most (2^N)-1 different
compressed files [2^(N-1) files of size N-1, 2^(N-2) of size N-2, and so on,
down to 1 file of size 0]. So at least two different input files must compress
to the same output file. Hence the compression program cannot be
lossless. (Much stronger results about the number of incompressible files can
be obtained, but the proofs are a little more complex.)
This argument applies of course to WEB's case (take N = 64K*8 bits). Note that
no assumption is made about the compression algorithm. The proof applies to
*any* algorithm, including those using an external dictionary, or repeated
application of another algorithm, or combination of different algorithms, or
representation of the data as formulas, etc... All schemes are subject to the
counting argument. There is no need to use information theory to provide a
proof, just basic mathematics. [People interested in more elaborate proofs can
consult http://wwwvms.utexas.edu/~cbloom/news/nomagic.html ]
This assumes of course that the information available to the decompressor is
only the bit sequence of the compressed data. If external information such as a
file name, a number of iterations, or a bit length is necessary to decompress
the data, the bits necessary to provide the extra information must be included
in the bit count of the compressed data. Otherwise, it would be sufficient to
consider any input data as a number, use this as the file name, iteration count
or bit length, and pretend that the compressed size is zero. For an example of
storing information in the file name, see the program lmfjyh in the 1993
International Obfuscated C Code Contest, available on all comp.sources.misc
archives (Volume 39, Issue 104).
A common flaw in the algorithms claimed to compress all files is to assume that
arbitrary bit strings can be sent to the decompressor without actually
transmitting their bit length. If the decompressor needs such bit lengths
to decode the data (when the bit strings do not form a prefix code), the
number of bits needed to encode those lengths must be taken into account
in the total size of the compressed data.
Another common (but still incorrect) argument is to assume that for any file,
some still to be discovered algorithm might find a seed for a pseudo-random
number generator which would actually generate the whole sequence of bytes
contained in the file. However this idea still fails to take into account the
counting argument. For example, if the seed is limited to 64 bits, this
algorithm can generate at most 2^64 different files, and thus is unable to
compress *all* files longer than 8 bytes.
Yet another popular idea is to split the input bit stream into a sequence of
large numbers, and factorize those numbers. Unfortunately, the number of
bits required to encode the factors and their exponents is on average
not smaller than the number of bits of the original bit stream, so this
scheme too cannot compress random data.
Steve Tate <srt@cs.unt.edu> suggests a good challenge for programs
that are claimed to compress random data by a significant amount:
Here's a wager for you: First, send me the DEcompression algorithm. Then I
will send you a file of whatever size you want, but at least 100k. If you
can send me back a compressed version that is even 20% shorter (80k if the
input is 100k) I'll send you $100. Of course, the file must be able to be
decompressed with the program you previously sent me, and must match
exactly my original file. Now what are you going to provide
when... er... if you can't demonstrate your compression in such a way?
So far no one has accepted this challenge (for good reasons).
9.3 The WEB 16:1 compressor
9.3.1 What the press says
April 20, 1992 Byte Week Vol 4. No. 25:
"In an announcement that has generated high interest - and more than a
bit of skepticism - WEB Technologies (Smyrna, GA) says it has
developed a utility that will compress files of greater than 64KB in
size to about 1/16th their original length. Furthermore, WEB says its
DataFiles/16 program can shrink files it has already compressed."
[...]
"A week after our preliminary test, WEB showed us the program successfully
compressing a file without losing any data. But we have not been able
to test this latest beta release ourselves."
[...]
"WEB, in fact, says that virtually any amount of data can be squeezed
to under 1024 bytes by using DataFiles/16 to compress its own output
multiple times."
June 1992 Byte, Vol 17 No 6:
[...] According to Earl Bradley, WEB Technologies' vice president of
sales and marketing, the compression algorithm used by DataFiles/16
is not subject to the laws of information theory. [...]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
9.3.2 First details, by John Wallace <buckeye@spf.trw.com>
I called WEB at (404)514-8000 and they sent me some product
literature as well as chatting for a few minutes with me on the phone.
Their product is called DataFiles/16, and their claims for it are
roughly those heard on the net.
According to their flier:
"DataFiles/16 will compress all types of binary files to approximately
one-sixteenth of their original size ... regardless of the type of
file (word processing document, spreadsheet file, image file,
executable file, etc.), NO DATA WILL BE LOST by DataFiles/16."
(Their capitalizations; 16:1 compression only promised for files >64K
bytes in length.)
"Performed on a 386/25 machine, the program can complete a
compression/decompression cycle on one megabyte of data in less than
thirty seconds"
"The compressed output file created by DataFiles/16 can be used as the
input file to subsequent executions of the program. This feature of
the utility is known as recursive or iterative compression, and will
enable you to compress your data files to a tiny fraction of the
original size. In fact, virtually any amount of computer data can
be compressed to under 1024 bytes using DataFiles/16 to compress its
own output files muliple times. Then, by repeating in reverse the
steps taken to perform the recusive compression, all original data
can be decompressed to its original form without the loss of a single
bit."
Their flier also claims:
"Constant levels of compression across ALL TYPES of FILES"
"Convenient, single floppy DATA TRANSPORTATION"
From my telephone conversation, I was assured that this is an
actual compression program. Decompression is done by using only the
data in the compressed file; there are no hidden or extra files.
9.3.3 More information, by Rafael Ramirez <rafael.ramirez@channel1.com>:
Today (Tuesday, 28th) I got a call from Earl Bradley of Web
who now says that they have put off releasing a software version of
the algorithm because they are close to signing a major contract with
a big company to put the algorithm in silicon. He said he could not
name the company due to non-disclosure agreements, but that they had
run extensive independent tests of their own and verified that the
algorithm works. [...]
He said the algorithm is so simple that he doesn't want anybody
getting their hands on it and copying it even though he said they
have filed a patent on it. [...] Mr. Bradley said the silicon version
would hold up much better to patent enforcement and be harder to copy.
He claimed that the algorithm takes up about 4K of code, uses only
integer math, and the current software implementation only uses a 65K
buffer. He said the silicon version would likely use a parallel
version and work in real-time. [...]
9.3.4 No software version
Appeared on BIX, reposted by Bruce Hoult <Bruce.Hoult@actrix.gen.nz>:
tojerry/chaos #673, from abailey, 562 chars, Tue Jun 16 20:40:34 1992
Comment(s).
----------
TITLE: WEB Technology
I promised everyone a report when I finally got the poop on WEB's
16:1 data compression. After talking back and forth for a year
and being put off for the past month by un-returned phone calls,
I finally got hold of Marc Spindler who is their sales manager.
_No_ software product is forth coming, period!
He began talking about hardware they are designing for delivery
at the end of the year. [...]
9.3.5 Product cancelled
Posted by John Toebes <toebes@bnr.ca> on Aug 10th, 1992:
[Long story omitted, confirming the reports made above about the
original WEB claims.]
10JUL92 - Called to Check Status. Was told that testing had uncovered a
new problem where 'four numbers in a matrix were the same
value' and that the programmers were off attempting to code a
preprocessor to eliminate this rare case. I indicated that he
had told me this story before. He told me that the
programmers were still working on the problem.
31JUL92 - Final Call to Check Status. Called Earl in the morning and
was told that he still had not heard from the programmers. [...]
Stated that if they could not resolve the problem then there would
probably not be a product.
03AUG92 - Final Call. Earl claims that the programmers are unable to
resolve the problem. I asked if this meant that there would
not be a product as a result and he said yes.
9.3.6 Byte's final report
Extract from the Nov. 95 issue of Byte, page 42:
Not suprisingly, the beta version of DataFiles/16 that reporter Russ Schnapp
tested didn't work. DataFiles/16 compressed files, but when decompressed, those
files bore no resemblance to their originals. WEB said it would send us a
version of the program that worked, but we never received it.
When we attempted to follow up on the story about three months later, the
company's phone had been disconnected. Attempts to reach company officers
were also unsuccessful. [...]
9.4 Jules Gilbert
As opposed to WEB Technologies, Jules Gilbert <coffee@spock.ici.net> does not
claim to compress *all* files, but only "random or random-appearing" files.
Here are some quotes from a few of Mr Gilbert's articles, which can be helpful
to get a better idea of his claims. No comments or conclusions are given; if
you need more information contact Mr. Gilbert directly.
From: coffee@spock.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: No Magic Compressors, No Factoring Compressors, Jules Gilbert
is a liar
Date: 14 May 1996 03:13:31 -0400
Message-ID: <4n9bqr$89k@spock.ici.net>
[...]
I will, in front of several Boston area computer scientists ('monitors'),
people I choose but generally known to be fair and competent, under
conditions which are sufficient to prevent disclosure of the method and fully
protect the algorithm and other aspects of the underlying method from
untoward discovery, use two computers, (which I am permitted to examine but
not alter) with both machine's running Linux, and with the file-systems and
Linux OS freshly restored from commercial CD-ROM's do the following:
On one machine (the 'src-CPU') will be loaded a copy of the CALGARY-CORPUS.
(Or other agreed on '.ZIP' or '.ARJ' file.)
I will compress the CALGARY-CORPUS for transfer from the src-CPU onto 3.5"
disks and transfer it (by sneaker-net) to the other machine for decompression
and produce a perfect copy of the CORPUS file on the 'dst-CPU'.
The CORPUS archive contents will not be 'cracked', ie', the original CORPUS
can be encrypted and the password kept from me. All I care about is that the
input file is highly random-aprearing.
I claim that I can perform this process several times, and each iteration
will reduce the overall file by at least 50%, ie., a ratio of 2:1. An
'iteration' will constitute copying, using compression, from the src-CPU to
the dst-CPU, and then reversing the direction to achieve another iteration.
For example, for say a 4M input file, it is reasonable to expect an
approximately 1M output file, after two complete iterations.
[...]
ONLY RANDOM OR RANDOM-APPEARING DATA INPUT CAN BE COMPRESSED BY MY METHOD.
[...]
If one iteration (of the compression 'sandwich') consists of two parts, say
an LZ phase followed by a JG phase, the LZ method will compression by
perhaps a ration of 2:1 (at the first iteration), perhaps much better if the
input is text, and the JG phase will do 3-4:1, but slowly!! During
subsequent iterations, the LZ phase will do perhaps 1.25:1 and the JG phase
will continue to do about 3-4:1.
Experimentally, I have achieved compression results of nearly 150:1, overall,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
for a 60M file. (I started with a '.arj' archive of a large DOS partition.)
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: coffee@spock.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Explanation: that uh, alg thing...
Date: 15 May 1996 16:38:18 -0400
Message-ID: <4ndfbq$cf3@spock.ici.net>
[...]
One more thing, I am preparing a short technical note to deal with the reason
most programmers' and computer scientists' think it's impossible to (further)
compress random input. (Many people think that because you can't get more
than 2^N messages from a N-bit compressed msg, that it means that you can't
compress random input. (Lot's of folks have told me that.) The short story
is:
I agree that you can not get more than 2^N messages from N bits. No question
about it. BUT THAT STATMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WHATSOEVER WITH THE
INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THOSE BITS 'MEAN'.
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: coffee@spock.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Seeing is believing!
Date: 9 Jun 1996 03:20:52 -0400
Message-ID: <4pdu0k$otg@spock.ici.net>
[...]
If your firm needs industrial-strength compression, contact 'coffee@ici.net'
and ask us for an on-site demonstration of our MR2 compressors. Each can
compress large files of 'random-appearing' information, whether RSA-encrypted
blocks, or files already compressed using LZ-techniques.
Our demonstration will give you the opportunity to observe compression of
'random-appearing' files of at least 100MB by at least 3:1 per iteration.
Usually, several iterations are possible. (These are minimum figures easily
exceeded.)
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: coffee@spock.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: My remarks on Jules Gilbert
Date: 24 Jul 1996 18:05:44 -0400
Message-ID: <4t66no$9qq@spock.ici.net>
[...]
My claims can not possibly be true IF I'M PLAYING BY THE 'RULES' THAT YOU
ASSUME APPLY TO ME. (Sorry to shout).
Clearly, anyone sending a signal (in the Shannon context), is constrained by
limits which make it impossible to compress RAD ('random-appearing data')
input.
[...]
1) I can't compress bits any better than the next guy. Maybe not as well,
in fact.
2) I have designed an engine that accepts RAD input and emits far too little
data to reconstitute the original data, based on conventional
assumptions. Okay! I know this.
3) But, I none-the-less reconstitute the original data.
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: coffee@soran.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Jules Gilbert's New Compresssion Technology
Date: 12 Aug 1996 08:11:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4un70u$a2r@soran.ici.net>
I have multiple methods for compressing RAD. Watch carefully:
MR1 does 3:1, on large buffers and is repeatable until the volume of input
data falls below 128k or so. (This figure is under user control, but
compreesion quality will suffer as the buffer size is decreased). Recent
changes make this method about as fast as any conventional compressor.
MR2 does at least 6:1, with a minimum buffer size of perhaps 32k. It is also
repeatable. MR2 does not actually compress, though. Instead, it translates
an input buffer into an output buffer of roughly equivalent size. This
output buffer contains mostly constants, and other things, such as simple
sequences: 28,29,31,32,33,35,40,41,42,43,44,45. (An actual sequence of
bytes). Obviously, this kind of information is readily compressed, and that
is why I claim that MR2 can achieve a minimum of 6:1. Again, like MR1, this
process can be re-applied over it's own output.
When, I've said, "No, it's impossible to compress by 100:1" I was trying to
get this audience to see this as realistic. But I can compress RAD files
100:1 if allowed to re-process the output through the same process. I first
actually achieved a 100:1 compression level in March of this year using tools
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
designed for experimenting in RAD issues. But now I have C programs which
have been written to be easy to understand and are intended to be part of my
technology transfer process for clients.
[...]
So, can someone compress by 100:1 or even 1000:1? Yes! But ONLY if the input
file is sufficiently large. A 1000:1 compression ratio would require a very
large input file, and, at least for PC users, archive files of this size are
almost never produced.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: coffee@soran.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Gilbert's RAD compression product
Date: 18 Aug 1996 08:40:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4v72vs$quc@soran.ici.net>
[...]
(In my original remarks), I am quoted above as claiming that a 3,152,896 byte
'tar 'file (conventionally compressed to 1,029,790 bytes) can be compressed
to 50*1024 bytes. It's an accurate quote.
Now how can that be possible?
If a gzip compressed version of the Corpus requires roughly a 1MB, what do I
do with the 950k bytes I don't store in the compressed intermediate file?
Well, that's certainly a puzzler!
For now, all I will say is that it does not go into the compressed
intermediate file. And because it doesn't, Shannons' channel capacity axioms
apply only to the 50k component.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: coffee@soran.ici.net (Jules Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Some answers about MR1
Date: 22 Aug 1996 23:45:54 -0400
Message-ID: <4vj9hi$pkb@soran.ici.net>
[...]
However, arrangements are being made to do another demo in September at MIT.
One of the files compressed and decompressed will be the Corpus, after it's
already been compressed using ARJ, a good quality conventional compressor.
(It should be about a 1MB at that point). My program has made the corpus
as small as 6k, although that requires SEVERAL separate physical passes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Because we will only have a few minutes to spend on this single file, I'll
likely stop at 250k or so.
Under Linux, the total size of the compressor and decompressor load modules
is about 50k bytes. And under DOS, using the Intel C compiler (a great
product, but sadly, not sold anymore), the same files total about 300k bytes.
MR1 contains code that is highly dependent on the particularities of a host
computer's floating point processor, or more correctly, architectural differ-
ences existing between the source machine and the target machine would likely
cause failure to de-compress.
[...]
9.5 David C. James
On July 2, 1996, David C. James was granted patent 5,533,051 "Method for data
compression" for a method claimed to be effective even on random data.
From: u137@aol.com (Peter J. Cranstone)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: Re: Jules Gilbert's Compression Technology
Date: Sun Aug 18 12:48:11 EDT 1996
Wh have just been issued a patent (US. #5,533,051) and have several more
pending on a new method for data compression. It will compess all types of
data, including "random", and data containing a uniform distribution of
"0's" and "1's".
[...]
The first line of the patent abstract is:
Methods for compressing data including methods for compressing highly
randomized data are disclosed.
Page 3, line 34 of the patent states:
A second aspect of the present invention which further enhances its ability
to achieve high compression percentages, is its ability to be applied to
data recursively. Specifically, the methods of the present invention are
able to make multiple passes over a file, each time further compressing the
file. Thus, a series of recursions are repeated until the desired
compression level is achieved.
Page 27, line 18 of the patent states that the claimed method can compress
without loss *all* files by at least one bit:
the direct bit encode method of the present invention is effective for
reducing an input string by one bit regardless of the bit pattern of the
input string.
The counting argument shows that this is mathematically impossible (see section
9.2) above. If the method were indeed able to shrink any file by at least one
bit, applying it recursively would shrink gigabytes down to a few bits.
The patent contains evasive arguments to justify the impossible claims:
Page 12, line 22:
Of course, this does not take into account any overhead registers or other
"house-keeping" type information which must be tracked. However such
overhead tends to be negligible when processing the large quantities of
data typically encountered in data compression applications.
Page 27, line 17:
Thus, one skilled in the art can see that by keeping the appropriate
counters, the direct bit encode method of the present invention is
effective for reducing an input string by one bit regardless of the bit
pattern of the input string. Although a certain amount of "loss" is
necessary in keeping and maintaining various counters and registers, for
files which are sufficiently large, this overhead is insignificant compared
to the savings obtained by the direct bit encode method.
The flaw in these arguments is that the the "house-keeping" type information
is *not* negligible. If it is properly taken it into account, it cancels any
gains made elsewhere when attempting to compress random data.
The patent contains even more evasive arguments:
Page 22, line 31:
It is commonly stated that perfectly entropic data streams cannot be
compressed. This misbelief is in part based on the sobering fact that for a
large set of entropic data, calculating the number of possible bit pattern
combinations is unfathomable. For example, if 100 ones and 100 zeros are
randomly distributed in a block 200 bits long, there are
200C100 = 9.055 10^58
combinations possible. The numbers are clearly unmanageable and hence the
inception that perfectly entropic data streams cannot be compressed. The
key to the present compression method under discussion is that it makes no
attempt to deal with such large amounts of data and simply operates on
smaller portions.
The actual claims of the patent are harmless since they only describe
methods which cannot work (they actually expand random data instead of
compressing it). For example, claims 6 and 7 are:
6. A method of compressing a stream of binary data, comprising the steps of:
A) parsing n-bits from said stream of binary data;
B) determining the value of said parsed n-bits;
C) based on the results of step B, coding said values of said n-bits in at
least one of a first, second, and third target string, wherein coding
said value includes generating a plurality of code strings and
correlating said value with one of said code strings and dividing said
correlated code string variable length codes and dividing at least some
of said into at least first and second segments, and assigning at least
one of said correlated code string segments to at least one of said
first, second, and third target strings, wherein at least one of said
plurality of codes is not greater than n-1 bits long.
7. The method of compressing a stream of binary data of claim 6, wherein n=2.
Making abstraction of the legalese, claim 7 says in short that you can
compress an arbitrary sequence of two bits down to one bit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [10] Fake compression programs (OWS, WIC)
Some programs claimed to achieve incredible compression ratios are completely
fake: they do not compress at all but just stored the uncompressed data in
hidden files on the hard disk or keep it in unused clusters. Needless to say,
such programs are dangerous and should never be used because there is a
significant risk of losing all the data.
The OWS program just remembers which clusters contained the data on the hard
disk. The data can be recovered only if those clusters are not used again for
another file.
The WIC program searches for the first directory in drive C: and creates a
hidden file called WINFILE.DLL containing a copy of all the original files.
If you copy the compressed file to another computer (which doesn't have the
file WINFILE.DLL), WIC reports a CRC error.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [11] What is the V.42bis standard?
A description of the V.42bis standard is given in "The V.42bis
standard for data-compressing modems," by Clark Thomborson
<cthombor@theory.lcs.mit.edu>, IEEE Micro, Oct 1992, pp. 41-53.
If you are looking for freeware source of V.42bis, please read the note
below by Peter Gutman explaining why there is no such source code.
Short introduction, by Alejo Hausner <hausner@qucis.queensu.ca>:
The V.42bis Compression Standard was proposed by the International
Consultative Committee on Telephony and Telegraphy (CCITT, now ITU-T) as
an addition to the v.42 error-correction protocol for modems. Its purpose
is to increase data throughput, and uses a variant of the
Lempel-Ziv-Welch (LZW) compression method. It is meant to be
implemented in the modem hardware, but can also be built into the
software that interfaces to an ordinary non-compressing modem.
V.42bis can send data compressed or not, depending on the
data. There are some types of data that cannot be
compressed. For example, if a file was compressed first,
and then sent through a V.42bis modem, the modem would not
likely reduce the number of bits sent. Indeed it is likely
that the amount of data would increase somewhat.
To avoid this problem, the algorithm constantly monitors the
compressibility of the data, and if it finds fewer bits
would be necessary to send it uncompressed, it switches to
transparent mode. The sender informs the receiver of this
transition through a reserved code word. Henceforth the
data is passed as plain bytes.
While transmitting in transparent mode, the sender maintains
the LZW trees of strings, and expects the receiver to do
likewise. If it finds an advantage in returning to
compressed mode, it will do so, first informing the receiver
by a special escape code. Thus the method allows the
hardware to adapt to the compressibility of the data.
The choice of escape code is clever. Initially, it is a
zero byte. Any occurrence of the escape code is replaced,
as is customary, by two escape codes. In order to prevent a
string of escape codes from temporarily cutting throughput
in half, the escape code is redefined by adding 51 mod 256
each time it is used.
A note from Peter Gutman <pgut01@cs.auckland.ac.nz> about V.42bis
implementations:
V.42bis is covered by patents, and the licensing terms are rather complex
because you need to license it from multiple organisations. At one point
British Telecom were charging something like 30,000 pounds for a license
(this was a few years ago, things may have changed since then). Because of
this, noone has ever implemented a freely-available version of V.42bis as
you'd find in a modem. There is a Unix implementation (called "compact") of
a V.42bis-like algorithm which comes with a great many disclaimers that it
can only be used for research purposes. [Note from FAQ maintainer: "compact"
is available in
http://ftp.sunet.se/ftp/pub/usenet/comp.sources.misc/volume15/compact_sv/
The 'shrink' method of zip 1.1 (see item 2 above) is also similar to V.42bis]
If you've ever wondered why noone other than modem manufacturers ever use
V.42bis for anything, this is it.
The CCITT (ITU-T) standards documents used to be available by ftp on
ftp.uu.net in /doc/standards/ccitt, but this service has been
discontinued. If you ftp to digital.resource.org, in directory
pub/standards there is a file that says that making the standards
available in the first place was just an experiment.
The documents are now on src.doc.ic.ac.uk, but the directory name
keeps changing. Check one of:
/computing/ccitt/ccitt-standards/ccitt/
/computing/ccitt/standards/ccitt
/doc/ccitt-standards/ccitt
in this order. The v42bis standard is in *standards/ccitt/1992/v/v42bis.asc.Z.
See also item 20 below for other sites with standards documents.
A mail server for CCITT (ITU-T) documents is available at teledoc@itu.arcom.ch
or itudoc@itu.ch. A Gopher server is also available at gopher://info.itu.ch
See also the Standards FAQ posted to news.answers or get it by ftp in
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/standards-faq
For ISO documents, try http://www.iso.ch/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [12] I need source for the winners of the Dr Dobbs compression contest
The source of the top 6 programs of the Feb 91 Dr Dobbs data compression
contest are available by ftp on
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/compress/ddjcompr.zip
ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/source/ddjcompr.zip
The sources are in MSDOS end-of-line format, one directory per
program. Unix or VMS users, use "unzip -a ddjcompr" to get correct
end-of-lines (add -d to recreate the directory structure if you are
using an obsolete version of unzip such as 4.1). Three of the 6
programs are not portable and only run on MSDOS. compact and urban
work on Unix, sixpack only requires minor modifications.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [13] I need source for arithmetic coding
(See question 70 for an introduction to arithmetic coding.)
The source for the arithmetic coder described in Chap.5 of Bell, Cleary, and
Witten's book "Text Compression" (see question 7 above) (or, equivalently, in:
Witten, Neal, and Cleary's article "Arithmetic Coding for data Compression"
from Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 30 (6),
pp.520-540, June, 1987) is in ftp://ftp.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/pub/projects/ar.cod/
It only comes with a simple order-0 model but it's set up so that adding your
own more sophisticated one is straightforward. Look also in
ftp://munnari.mu.oz.au/pub/arith_coder
A low precision arithmetic coding implementation avoiding hardware
division is available on the same site in
ftp://ftp.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/pub/projects/arithmetic.coding/low.precision.version
file low.precision.version.shar
Kris Popat <popat@image.mit.edu> has worked on "Scalar Quantization
with Arithmetic Coding." It describes an arithmetic coding technique
which is quite general and computationally inexpensive. The
documentation and example C code are available via anonymous ftp from
media-lab.media.mit.edu (18.85.0.2), in /pub/k-arith-code.
The program 'urban' in ddjcompr.zip (see item 12 above) is a high order
arithmetic coder working at the bit level. It is written by Urban Koistinen
<md85-epi@nada.kth.se>.
The DMC program is available in ftp://plg.uwaterloo.ca/pub/dmc/*.c. It
implements the algorithm described in "Data Compression using Dynamic
Markov Modelling", by Gordon Cormack and Nigel Horspool, Computer
Journal 30:6 (December 1987). This program uses Guazzo's version of
arithmetic coding.
An implementation of Moffat's arithmetic coder is available in
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~jmd/ArithCoder.tar.gz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [15] Where can I get image compression programs?
JPEG:
Source code for most any machine:
ftp://ftp.uu.net/graphics/jpeg/jpegsrc.v6a.tar.gz
ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/graphics/packages/jpeg/jpegsrc.v6.tar.gz
Contact: jpeg-info@uunet.uu.net (Independent JPEG Group)
havefun.stanford.edu:pub/jpeg/JPEGv1.2.1.tar.Z (supports lossless mode)
Contact: Andy Hung <achung@cs.stanford.edu> (see item 20 below)
ftp://ftp.cs.cornell.edu/pub/multimed/ljpg.tar.Z (lossless jpeg)
xv, an image viewer which can read JPEG pictures, is available in
ftp://ftp.cis.upenn.edu/pub/xv/xv-3.10a.tar.Z
MPEG:
ftp://havefun.stanford.edu/pub/mpeg/MPEGv1.2.1.tar.Z
Contact: Andy Hung <achung@cs.stanford.edu> (see item 20 below)
ftp://mm-ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/multimedia/mpeg/play/
mpeg_play-2.3-patched-src.tar.gz
Contact: mpeg-bugs@cs.berkeley.edu
ftp://flash.bu.edu/pub/code/mpeg_system/mpeg_system_source_v1.0.tar.gz
(MPEG-I Multi-Stream System Layer encoder/player; includes an
enhanced version of mpeg_play)
Contact: Jim Boucher <jboucher@spiderman.bu.edu> or Ziv Yaar <zyaar@bu.edu>
ftp://ftp.mni.mcgill.ca/pub/mpeg/mpeg_lib-1.2.tar.gz [MPEG library]
Contact: Gregory Ward <greg@pet.mni.mcgill.ca>
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/cfogg/mpeg/vmpeg/vmpeg17.exe
Contact: Stefan Eckart <stefan@lis.e.technik.tu-muenchen.de>
ftp://decel.ecel.uwa.edu.au/users/michael/mpegw32f.zip (for Windows and NT)
ftp://nvr.com/pub/NVR-software/Product-1.0.4.tar.Z
(free demo copy of NVR's software toolkit for SPARCstations)
Contact: Todd Brunhoff <toddb@nvr.com>
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/cfogg/mpeg2/* (MPEG-2 encoder and decoder)
Contact: MPEG-L@netcom.com (MPEG Software Simulation Group)
H.261(P*64):
havefun.stanford.edu:pub/p64/P64v1.2.tar.Z
Contact: Andy Hung <achung@cs.stanford.edu> (see item 20 below)
ftp://zenon.inria.fr/rodeo/ivs/last_version/ivs*-src.tar.gz
(Inria videoconference system)
Contact: Thierry Turletti <turletti@sophia.inria.fr> (see item 20 below).
H.263: (by Telenor Research)
http://www.nta.no/brukere/DVC/h263_software
JBIG:
ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/graphics/misc/test-images/jbig.tar.gz.
ftp://ftp.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/pub/doc/ISO/JBIG/jbigkit-0.9.tar.gz
Contact: Markus Kuhn <mskuhn@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
PNG: For code and sample images, see:
http://quest.jpl.nasa.gov/PNG/
ftp://ftp.uu.net/graphics/png/
ftp://swrinde.nde.swri.edu/pub/png/
mg: (the MG system for compressing and indexing text and images, see item 16)
ftp://munnari.oz.au/pub/mg/*
Contact: Stuart Inglis <singlis@cs.waikato.ac.nz>
BTPC: Binary Tree Predictive Coding
ftp://monet.uwaterloo.ca/pub/john/btpcv3.tar.Z
Contact: John Robinson <john@monet.uwaterloo.ca>
epic: (pyramid wavelet coder, see item 72)
ftp://whitechapel.media.mit.edu/pub/epic.tar.Z
Contact: Eero P. Simoncelli <eero@media.mit.edu>
The "Lenna" test image is available as part of the EPIC package,
where it is named "test_image".
hcompress: (wavelet image compression, see item 72)
ftp://stsci.edu/software/hcompress/hcompress.tar.Z
wavethresh: (wavelet software for the language S)
http://www.stats.bris.ac.uk/pub/software/wavethresh/wavethresh2.2/
Contact: gpn@maths.bath.ac.uk
rice-wlet: (wavelet software, see item 72)
ftp://cml.rice.edu/pub/dsp/software/rice-wlet-tools.tar.Z
Wavelet Transform Coder Construction Kit:
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~gdavis/wavelet/wavelet.html
Contact: Geoff Davis <gdavis@cs.dartmouth.edu>
scalable: (2 & 3 dimensional subband transformation)
ftp://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/pub/multimedia/scalable2.tar.Z
Contact: scalable@robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu
compfits:
ftp://uwila.cfht.hawaii.edu/pub/compfits/compfits.tar.Z
Contact: Jim Wright <jwright@cfht.hawaii.edu>
fitspress:
ftp://cfata4.harvard.edu/pub/fitspress08.tar.Z
tiff:
For source and sample images, see question 18 below.
DCT algorithms used to be in:
ftp://etro.vub.ac.be/pub/transfer/DCT_ALGORITHMS/
Contact: Charilos Christopoulos <chchrist@etro2.vub.ac.be> for the sources
xanim: (X11 animation viewer, supports Quicktime and several other formats)
ftp://ftp.x.org/contrib/applications/xanim2683.tar.Z
ftp://ftp.shell.portal.com/pub/podlipec/xanim26978.tar.gz
ppm2pz: (lossless 24-bit image compression)
http://www.jyu.fi/~kuru/compression.html
A demo of image compression using neural networks is available in
http://www.ee.duke.edu/~cec/index.html.
For fractal compression programs, see item 17 below.
For Vector Quantization software, see item 76 in part 2 of this FAQ.
For image compression hardware, see item 85 in part 3 of this FAQ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [16] What is the state of the art in lossless image compression?
The current state-of-the-art is the JBIG algorithm. For an
introduction to JBIG, see question 74 in part 2.
JBIG works best on bi-level images (like faxes) and also works well on
Gray-coded grey scale images up to about six or so bits per pixel. You
just apply JBIG to the bit planes individually. For more bits/pixel,
lossless JPEG provides better performance, sometimes. (For JPEG, see
question 19 below.)
You can find the specification of JBIG in International Standard
ISO/IEC 11544 or in ITU-T Recommendation T.82. You can order a copy
directly from ISO (www.iso.ch) or ITU (www.itu.ch) or from your
National Standards Body. In the USA, call ANSI at (212) 642-4900.
See also the MG system containing an implementation of the 'FELICS'
algorithm of P.G. Howard and J.S. Vitter. FELICS usually gives better
and faster compression than lossless JPEG, at least for 8-bit
grayscale images. (See item 15 above for ftp location). From the MG
README file:
The MG system is a suite of programs for compressing and
indexing text and images. Most of the functionality implemented
in the suite is as described in the book ``Managing Gigabytes:
Compressing and Indexing Documents and Images'', I.H. Witten, A.
Moffat, and T.C. Bell; Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1994, ISBN
0-442-01863-0; US $54.95; call 1 (800) 544-0550 to order.
These features include:
-- text compression using a Huffman-coded semi-static word-based
scheme
-- two-level context-based compression of bi-level images
-- FELICS lossless compression of gray-scale images
-- combined lossy/lossless compression for textual images
-- indexing algorithms for large volumes of text in limited main
memory
-- index compression
-- a retrieval system that processes Boolean and ranked queries
-- an X windows interface to the retrieval system
Paul Howard's PhD thesis, which among other things describes FELICS,
is available in ftp://ftp.cs.brown.edu/pub/techreports/93/cs93-28.ps.Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [17] What is the state of fractal compression?
You may want to read first item 77 in part 2 of this FAQ:
"Introduction to Fractal compression".
from Tal Kubo <kubo@zariski.harvard.edu>:
According to Barnsley's book 'Fractals Everywhere', this method is
based on a measure of deviation between a given image and its
approximation by an IFS code. The Collage Theorem states that there is
a convergent process to minimize this deviation. Unfortunately,
according to an article Barnsley wrote for BYTE a few years ago, this
convergence was rather slow, about 100 hours on a Cray, unless assisted by
a person.
Barnsley et al are not divulging any technical information beyond the
meager bit in 'Fractals Everywhere'. The book explains the idea of IFS
codes at length, but is vague about the application of the Collage theorem
to specific compression problems.
There is reason to believe that Barnsley's company has
*no algorithm* which takes a given reasonable image and achieves
the compression ratios initially claimed for their fractal methods.
The 1000-to-1 compression advertised was achieved only for a 'rigged'
class of images, with human assistance. The best unaided
performance I've heard of is good lossy compression of about 80-1.
Steve Tate <srt@duke.cs.duke.edu> confirms:
Compression ratios (unzoomed) seem to range from 20:1 to 60:1... The
quality is considerably worse than wavelets or JPEG on most of the
non-contrived images I have seen.
But Yuval Fisher <fisher@inls1.ucsd.edu> disagrees:
Their performance has improved dramatically beyond what they were
talking about in BYTE a few years ago. Human assistance to the
compression is no longer needed and the compression time is
reasonable, although the more time and compute power you throw at the
compression, the smaller the resulting file for the same level of
quality.
Geoffrey A Stephenson <ketlux@ketlux.demon.co.uk> adds:
Iterated systems are shipping a general purpose compressor at about
300 Pounds in the UK that claims "640x480 24 bit colour compression of
about 1 min at 922k -> 10k on a 486/50 software only, decomp. to 8
bits in 3 secs, etc." At a recent multimedia conference in London they
handed out free demo disks that show the decomp. in action. The
package runs under both DOS anf WIN (DLLs provided for use in
applications). They also sell a board to speed up compression and
offer versions supporting full motion video (but not apparently at all
SVGA sizes like the static picture version). I have not yet got my
hands on a full version to test different types of pictures, but
friends have a and claim it looks good.
Thomas W. Colthurst <thomasc@athena.mit.edu> clarifies the distinction
between IFS and the Fractal Transform:
It is time, once and for all, to put to death the Barnsley myth that
IFSs are good for image compression. They are not. Various algorithms
have been proposed for this "inverse problem" ranging from the trendy
(genetic algorithms) to the deep (moment methods) to the ad hoc (the
hungry algorithm) to the absurd (the so-called "graduate student
algorithm", consisting of locking up a grad student in a tiny office
with a SGI workstation and not letting them out until they come up
with a good IFS for your image). They are all useless for practical
image compression.
In fact, there are even good theoretical reasons for believing that
IFSs will never be useful for image compression. For example, even
if you have an IFS for object A and an IFS for object B, there is no
way to combine these IFSs to get an IFS for object A union B or
object A intersect B.
Even Barnsley himself admits, in his latest book, that he doesn't use
IFS image compression. Instead, he uses the so-called "fractal
transform," which is really just a variant of vector quantization
where you use the image itself, sampled at a higher scale, as the
VQ codebook. To be fair, the fractal transform can be analyzed using
local IFSs, but local IFSs are immensely more complicated and general
than normal IFSs, to the point where one feels suspect even using the
word "IFS" to describe them.
It should be emphasized that the fractal transform is a real, working
method that performs about as well as other existing methods like VQ
or the discrete cosine transform. The fractal transform will probably
never beat vector quantization (VQ) as for size of the compressed
image, but does have the advantage that you don't need to carry your
codebook around. The latest results have it slightly winning over
the discrete cosine transform; only time and more research will tell
if this advantage persists. Just like VQ, the fractal transform
takes a while to compress, but is quick at decompression (Barnsley's
company has hardware to do this in realtime).
In short, IFSs are good for just about everything fractals are (and
more!), but are absolutely horrid for image compression.
Programs:
Check http://links.uwaterloo.ca/ for pointers to some fractal compression
programs and lots of papers on fractal compression.
The Waterloo BragZone (http://links.uwaterloo.ca/bragzone.base.html
or ftp://links.uwaterloo.ca/pub/BragZone/ ) compares the results of
various image compression schemes against a 32 element test suite.
Numerous rate-distortion graphs, data tables, and sample images are available.
A fractal image compression program is available by ftp in
ftp://inls.ucsd.edu/pub/young-fractal/yuvpak20.zip ; it contains source for
compression and decompression, source for X-windows decompression,
MSDOS executables and images. [Note from FAQ maintainer: Fisher's
program (see below) implements the same algorithm but is more general;
see http://inls.ucsd.edu/y/Fractals/ for the source code.]
A fractal image decompression program (note: decompression only) is
available in ftp://inls.ucsd.edu/pub/inls-ucsd/fractal-2.0.tar
In the same directory, fractal_paper.ps.Z is the paper "Fractal image
compression" by Yuval Fisher, Siggraph 92. Reading this paper is
required to understand how the Young compression programs (see above) works.
A note from Yuval Fisher <yfisher@ucsd.edu>:
Connect to http://inls.ucsd.edu/y/Fractals/ . There is
information there on my new book of contributed articles on
fractal image compression, as well as the book's table of
contents, some C code to encode and decode raw byte files of any
size using a quadtree method, a manual explaining the use of the
code, a fractal image compression bibliography (not guaranteed to
be complete or close to it), some better executable code with
sample encodings, and the SIGGRAPH '92 course notes on fractal
image compression (these are based on appendix A of Chaos and
Fractals by Peitgen et al., Springer Verlag). [The C code is also
available in ftp://inls.ucsd.edu/pub/inls-ucsd/frac_comp.tar.Z ]
Another fractal compression program is available by ftp in
ftp://vision.auc.dk/pub/Limbo/Limbo*.tar.Z. It is also based on quadtrees,
as yuvpak20 and frac_comp.
The source code for the program published in the Oct 93 issue of
Byte is in ftp://ftp.uu.net/published/byte/93oct/fractal.exe. This is
a self-extractible arc file (must be run on MSDOS for extraction).
The source code is for a TARGA video board. [Note from FAQ maintainer:
this code is taken from Barnsley's book "Fractal Image Compression";
it implements the brute force method and is thus very slow.]
Iterated Systems have released a beta version of their fractal imager.
It will let you view a number of formats including JPG and do
conversions to their fractal format. The program can be downloaded
from http://www.iterated.com
"The Data Compression Book" (see [NEL 1996] in item 7 above) contains
a chapter on fractal compression; it includes source code for a simple
fractal compression program.
Several papers on fractal image compression are available on
ftp.informatik.uni-freiburg.de in directory /documents/papers/fractal . A
biliography is in ftp://schmance.uwaterloo.ca/pub/Fractal/fractal.biblio.ps.Z
References:
A. Jacquin, 'Fractal image coding based on a theory of iterated
contractive image transformations', Proc. SPIE Visual Communications
and Image Processing, 1990, pages 227-239. (The best paper that explains
the concept in a simple way.)
A. Jacquin, "A Fractal Theory of Iterated Markov Operators with
Applications to Digital Image Coding", PhD Thesis, Georgia Tech, 1989.
It can be obtained from university microfilms for $35, phone 1-800-521-0600.
M. Barnsley, L. Anson, "Graphics Compression Technology, SunWorld,
October 1991, pp. 42-52.
M.F. Barnsley, A. Jacquin, F. Malassenet, L. Reuter & A.D. Sloan,
'Harnessing chaos for image synthesis', Computer Graphics,
vol 22 no 4 pp 131-140, 1988.
M.F. Barnsley, A.E. Jacquin, 'Application of recurrent iterated
function systems to images', Visual Comm. and Image Processing,
vol SPIE-1001, 1988.
A. Jacquin, "Image Coding Based on a Fractal Theory of Iterated Contractive
Image Transformations" p.18, January 1992 (Vol 1 Issue 1) of IEEE Trans
on Image Processing.
A.E. Jacquin, 'A novel fractal block-coding technique for digital
images', Proc. ICASSP 1990.
G.E. Oien, S. Lepsoy & T.A. Ramstad, 'An inner product space
approach to image coding by contractive transformations',
Proc. ICASSP 1991, pp 2773-2776.
D.S. Mazel, Fractal Modeling of Time-Series Data, PhD Thesis,
Georgia Tech, 1991. (One dimensional, not pictures)
S. A. Hollatz, "Digital image compression with two-dimensional affine
fractal interpolation functions", Department of Mathematics and
Statistics, University of Minnesota-Duluth, Technical Report 91-2.
(a nuts-and-bolts how-to-do-it paper on the technique)
Stark, J., "Iterated function systems as neural networks",
Neural Networks, Vol 4, pp 679-690, Pergamon Press, 1991.
Monro D M and Dudbridge F, "Fractal block coding of images",
Electronics Letters 28(11):1053-1054 (1992)
Beaumont J M, "Image data compression using fractal techniques",
British Telecom Technological Journal 9(4):93-108 (1991)
Fisher Y, "Fractal image compression", Siggraph 92
Graf S, "Barnsley's Scheme for the Fractal Encoding of Images",
Journal Of Complexity, V8, 72-78 (1992).
Monro D.M. 'A hybrid fractal transform', Proc ICASSP 93, pp. V: 169-72
Monro D.M. & Dudbridge F. 'Fractal approximation of image blocks',
Proc ICASSP 92, pp. III: 485-488
Monro D.M., Wilson D., Nicholls J.A. 'High speed image coding with the Bath
Fractal Transform', IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia Technologies
Southampton, April 1993
Jacobs, E.W., Y. Fisher and R.D. Boss. "Image Compression: A study
of the Iterated Transform Method." _Signal Processing 29_ (1992) 25-263
Vrscay, Edward R. "Iterated Function Systems: Theory, Applications,
and the Inverse Problem." _Fractal Geometry and Analysis_,
J. Belair and S. Dubuc (eds.) Kluwer Academic, 1991. 405-468.
Books:
Fractal Image Compression: Theory and Application, Yuval Fisher (ed.),
Springer Verlag, New York, 1995.
To order the book, call 1-800-SPRINGER and ask for the book with
ISBN number 0-387-94211-4 or check http://www.springer-ny.com/
Fractal Image Compression
Michael F. Barnsley and Lyman P. Hurd
ISBN 0-86720-457-5, ca. 250 pp., $49.95
Copies can be ordered directly from the publisher by sending a message
to kpeters@math.harvard.edu with name, address and a Mastercard or
Visa card number with expiration date.
Barnsley's company is:
Iterated Systems, Inc.
5550A Peachtree Parkway, Suite 650
Norcross, GA 30092
tel: 404-840-0310 or 1-800-4FRACTL
fax: 404-840-0806
In UK: Phone (0734) 880261, Fax (0734) 880360
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [18] I need specs and source for TIFF and CCITT group 4 Fax
Specs for Group 3 and 4 image coding (group 3 is very similar to group 4)
are in CCITT (1988) volume VII fascicle VII.3. They are recommendations
T.4 and T.6 respectively. There is also an updated spec contained in 1992
recommendations T.1 to T.6.
CCITT (now ITU-T) specs are available by anonymous ftp (see above answer on
V.42bis). The T.4 and T.6 specs are on src.doc.ic.ac.uk in directory
/computing/ccitt/ccitt-standards/ccitt/1988/ascii, files 7_3_01.txt.Z and
7_3_02.txt.Z respectively.
The following paper covers T.4, T.6 and JBIG:
"Review of standards for electronic imaging for facsimile systems"
in Journal of Electronic Imaging, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 5-21, January 1992.
Source code can be obtained as part of a TIFF toolkit - TIFF image
compression techniques for binary images include CCITT T.4 and T.6:
ftp://ftp.sgi.com/graphics/tiff/tiff-v3.4beta035-tar.gz
Contact: sam@engr.sgi.com
There is also a companion compressed tar file (v3.0pics.tar.Z) that
has sample TIFF image files. A draft of TIFF 6.0 is in TIFF6.ps.Z.
Concerning JPEG compression in TIFF 6.0, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> adds:
TIFF 6.0's scheme for incorporating JPEG compression (spec section 22) has
a bunch of serious deficiencies. Don't use it. A revised design is given
by TIFF Technical Note #2, ftp://ftp.sgi.com/graphics/tiff/TTN2.draft.txt
The revised design will replace section 22 in TIFF 7.0, and is implemented
in Sam Leffler's libtiff. See also item 75 of this FAQ for more JPEG info.
Software for reading and writing CCITT Group 3 and 4 images is
also available in directory ftp://merry.cs.monash.edu.au/pub/alanf/TIFF_FAX
Contact: Alan Finlay <alanf@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au>.
See also question 54 below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [19] What is JPEG?
JPEG (pronounced "jay-peg") is a standardized image compression mechanism.
JPEG stands for Joint Photographic Experts Group, the original name of the
committee that wrote the standard. JPEG is designed for compressing either
full-color or gray-scale digital images of "natural", real-world scenes.
It does not work very well on non-realistic images, such as cartoons or
line drawings.
JPEG does not handle black-and-white (1-bit-per-pixel) images, nor does it
handle motion picture compression. Related standards for compressing those
types of images exist, and are called JBIG and MPEG respectively.
Regular JPEG is "lossy", meaning that the image you get out of decompression
isn't quite identical to what you originally put in. The algorithm achieves
much of its compression by exploiting known limitations of the human eye,
notably the fact that small color details aren't perceived as well as small
details of light-and-dark. Thus, JPEG is intended for compressing images that
will be looked at by humans. If you plan to machine-analyze your images, the
small errors introduced by JPEG may be a problem for you, even if they are
invisible to the eye. The JPEG standard includes a separate lossless mode,
but it is rarely used and does not give nearly as much compression as the
lossy mode.
Question 75 "Introduction to JPEG" (in part 2 of this FAQ) gives an overview
of how JPEG works and provides references for further reading. Also see the
JPEG FAQ article, which covers JPEG software and usage hints. The JPEG FAQ is
posted regularly in news.answers by Tom Lane <tgl@netcom.com>. (See question
53 "Where are FAQ lists archived" if this posting has expired at your site.)
For JPEG software, see item 15 above.
For JPEG hardware, see item 85 in part 3 of this FAQ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [20] I am looking for source of an H.261/H.263 codec and MPEG
Many standards and draft recommendations (including H.261, H.263,
H.320, H.324), are available in http://www.imtc.org/imtc/
The H.261 spec is also available on src.doc.ic.ac.uk in
/computing/ccitt/standards/ccitt-standards/1992/h/h261.doc.Z (or h261.rtf.Z).
For H.261 hardware, see item 85 in part 3 of this FAQ.
Current drafts of H.324 and related recommendations including H.263 are
available in ftp://ftp.std.com/vendors/PictureTel/h324
Telenor Research have made available a complete simulation of
H.263. See http://www.nta.no/brukere/DVC/h263_software
from Thierry TURLETTI <turletti@sophia.inria.fr>:
IVS (INRIA VIDEOCONFERENCING SYSTEM)
- X11-based videoconferencing tool for SPARC, HP, DEC and
Silicon Graphic workstations.
ivs allows users to conduct multi-host audio and video
conferences over the Internet. ivs requires a workstation
with a screen with 1, 4, 8 or 24 bits depth. Multi-host
conferences require that the kernel support multicast IP
extensions (RFC 1112).
On video input, video frames are grabbed by the VideoPix,
SunVideo or Parallax boards for SparcStations or Raster Rops
board for HP stations or the IndigoVideo board for SGI IRIS
Indigo workstations. or the VIDEOTX board for DEC stations.
No special hardware apart from the workstation's build-in
audio hardware is required for audio conference.
Video encoding is done according to the H.261 standard.
The video stream can be encoded in either Super CIF
(704x576 pixels) format or CIF (352x288 pixels) format or
QCIF (176x144 pixels). Default format is CIF.
Sources, binaries & manuals are freely available by anonymous
ftp from zenon.inria.fr in the rodeo/ivs directory. An INRIA
report describing this application is also available in the
same directory.
If you ftp & use this package, please send all remarks or
modifications made to <turletti@sophia.inria.fr>. If you want
to be added or deleted to the ivs-users mailing list, please send
e-mail to ivs-users-request@sophia.inria.fr.
from Andy Hung <achung@cs.stanford.edu>:
Public domain UNIX C source code to do both image and image sequence
compression and decompression is available by anonymous ftp:
MPEG-I ftp://havefun.stanford.edu/pub/mpeg/MPEGv*.tar.Z
CCITT H.261(P*64) ftp://havefun.stanford.edu/pub/p64/P64v*.tar.Z
JPEG ftp://havefun.stanford.edu/pub/jpeg/JPEGv*.tar.Z
These codecs operate on raw raster scanned images.
A software program to display raw raster-scanned YUV images and image
sequences on X grayscale or color monitors is provided by a program in
ftp://havefun.stanford.edu/pub/cv/CVv*.tar.Z
If you are using the codecs above, we recommend that you ftp this file
over as well.
The source code has been compiled on DEC and SUN workstations.
Caution: the P64 codec has not been tested compliant (any available
p64 video streams would be much appreciated - please let us know at
achung@cs.stanford.edu). The other codecs have been tested with
streams from other encoders.
We also have some IPB MPEG-I video coded streams in pub/mpeg/*.mpg;
and P64 video streams in pub/p64/*.p64 that we have generated using
our codecs.
For a more complete description see the file
havefun.stanford.edu:pub/README.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [25] Fast DCT (Discrete Cosine Transform) algorithms
Many image compression methods, including the JPEG, MPEG, and H.261 standards,
are based on the discrete cosine transform. A good overall introduction to
DCT is the book "Discrete Cosine Transform---Algorithms, Advantages,
Applications" by K.R. Rao and P. Yip (Academic Press, London, 1990),
ISBN 0-12-580203-X. This has an extensive, though already dated, bibliography.
Here are some references mostly provided by Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>.
(This list is now rather dated.)
Most of these are in IEEE journals or conference proceedings, notably
ICASSP = IEEE Intl. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.
ICCAS = IEEE Intl. Conf. on Circuits and Systems.
DCC = Data Compression Conference.
Polynomial Transform Computation of the 2-D DCT, Duhamel & Guillemot,
ICASSP '90 p. 1515.
A Forward-Mapping Realization of the Inverse DCT, McMillan & Westover,
DCC '92 p. 219.
A Fast Algorithm for 2-D DCT, Cho, Yun & Lee, ICASSP '91 p. 2197.
Fast Algorithm and Implementation of 2-D DCT, Cho & Lee, Tr. CAS v38 p. 297.
A DCT Chip based on a new Structured and Computationally Efficient DCT
Algorithm, Duhamel, Guillemot & Carlach, ICCAS '90 p. 77.
Trade-offs in the Computation of Mono- and Multi-dimensional DCTs,
Vetterli, Duhamel & Guillemot, ICASSP '89 p. 999.
Practical Fast 1-D DCT Algorithms with 11 Multiplications,
Loeffler, Ligtenberg & Moschytz, ICASSP '89 p. 988.
New Scaled DCT Algorithms for Fused Multiply/Add Architectures,
Linzer & Feig, ICASSP '91 p. 2201.
Fast Algorithms for the 2-D Discrete Cosine Transform, Kamangar & Rao,
IEEE Tr. Computers, v C-31 p. 899.
Fast 2-D Discrete Cosine Transform, Vetterli, ICASSP '85 p. 1538.
A Two-Dimensional Fast Cosine Transform, Haque, Tr. ASSP v ASSP-33 p. 1532.
Real-Time Parallel and Fully Pipelined 2-D DCT Lattice Structures with
Application to HDTV Systems, Chiu & Liu, Tr. CAS for Video Tech, v 2 p. 25.
J.F. Blinn, "What's the Deal with the DCT", IEEE Computer Graphics and
Applications, July 1993, pp.78-83.
A C Hung and TH-Y Meng, "A Comparison of fast DCT algorithms, Multimedia
Systems, No. 5 Vol. 2, Dec 1994
For actual implementations, try the JPEG and MPEG software listed
in item 15.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [26] Are there algorithms and standards for audio compression?
Yes. See the introduction to MPEG given in part 2 of this FAQ.
A lossless compressor for 8bit and 16bit audio data (.au) is available
in ftp://svr-ftp.eng.cam.ac.uk/pub/comp.speech/coding/shorten.tar.gz
Shorten works by using Huffman coding of prediction residuals.
Compression is generally better than that obtained by applying general
purpose compression utilities to audio files. Also supports lossy
compression. Contact: Tony Robinson <ajr@eng.cam.ac.uk>.
Audio software is available on sunsite.unc.edu in subdirectories of
/pub/electronic-publications/IUMA/audio_utils:
- An MPEG audio player is in mpeg_players/Workstations/maplay1_2.tar.Z.
- The sources of the XING MPEG audio player for Windows is in
mpeg_players/Windows/mpgaudio.zip.
- An encoder/decoder is in converters/source/mpegaudio.tar.Z.
MSDOS audio software is available in
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/sound/
In particular, MPEG-2 audio software is in ampegsrc.zip and ampeg43.zip.
MPEG audio files are available in ftp.iuma.com and http://www.iuma.com/
Copied from the comp.dsp FAQ posted by guido@cwi.nl (Guido van Rossum):
Strange though it seems, audio data is remarkably hard to compress
effectively. For 8-bit data, a Huffman encoding of the deltas between
successive samples is relatively successful. For 16-bit data,
companies like Sony and Philips have spent millions to develop
proprietary schemes.
Public standards for voice compression are slowly gaining popularity,
e.g. CCITT G.721 and G.723 (ADPCM at 32 and 24 kbits/sec). (ADPCM ==
Adaptive Delta Pulse Code Modulation.) Free source code for a *fast*
32 kbits/sec ADPCM (lossy) algorithm is available by ftp from ftp.cwi.nl
as /pub/audio/adpcm.shar. (** NOTE: if you are using v1.0, you should get
v1.1, released 17-Dec-1992, which fixes a serious bug -- the quality
of v1.1 is claimed to be better than uLAW **)
(Note that U-LAW and silence detection can also be considered
compression schemes.)
Information and source code for adpcm are available in
http://www.nb.rockwell.com/ref/adpcm.html
Source for Sun's free implementation of CCITT compression types G.711,
G.721 and G.723 is in ftp://ftp.cwi.nl/pub/audio/ccitt-adpcm.tar.gz
You can get a G.721/722/723 package by email to teledoc@itu.arcom.ch, with
GET ITU-3022
as the *only* line in the body of the message.
A note on u-law from Markus Kuhn <mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>:
u-law (more precisely (greek mu)-law or 5-law if you have an 8-bit
ISO terminal) is more an encoding then a compression method,
although a 12 to 8 bit reduction is normally part of the encoding.
The official definition is CCITT recommendation G.711. If you want
to know how to get CCITT documents, check the Standards FAQ
posted to news.answers or get the file standards-faq by ftp in
directory ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/
See also the comp.dsp FAQ for more information on:
- The U.S. DoD's Federal-Standard-1016 based 4800 bps code excited linear
prediction voice coder version 3.2a (CELP 3.2a)
- The U.S. DoD's Federal-Standard-1015/NATO-STANAG-4198 based 2400 bps
linear prediction coder version 53 (LPC-10e v53)
- Realtime DSP code and hardware for FS-1015 and FS-1016
The comp.dsp FAQ is in comp.dsp with subject "FAQ: Audio File Formats" and in
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/audio-fmts/part1
CELP C code for Sun SPARCs is in ftp://ftp.super.org/pub/speech/celp_3.2a.tar.Z
An LPC10 speech coder is in ftp://ftp.super.org/pub/speech/lpc10-1.0.tar.gz ;
a derived version is in http://www.arl.wustl.edu/~jaf/lpc/lpc10-1.1.tar.gz
Source code for ITU-T (CCITT) G.728 Low Delay CELP speech compression
is in ftp://svr-ftp.eng.cam.ac.uk/pub/comp.speech/sources/ldcelp-2.0.tar.gz
Recommended reading:
Digital Coding of Waveforms: Principles and Applications to Speech and
Video. N. S. Jayant and Peter Noll. Prentice-Hall, 1984, ISBN
0-13-211913-7.
Information on GSM sound compression is available at
http://ccnga.uwaterloo.ca/~jscouria/gsm.html
from Markus Kuhn <mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>:
One highest quality sound compression format is called ASPEC and has
been developed by a team at the Frauenhofer Institut in Erlangen (Germany)
and others.
ASPEC produces CD like quality and offers several bitrates, one is
128 kbit/s. It is a lossy algorithm that throws away frequencies that
aren't registered in the human cochlea in addition to sophisticated
entropy coding. The 64 kbit/s ASPEC variant might soon bring hifi
quality ISDN phone connections. It has been implemented on standard DSPs.
The Layer 3 MPEG audio compression standard now contains what is officially
called the best parts of the ASPEC and MUSICAM algorithms. A reference is:
K.Brandenburg, G.Stoll, Y.F.Dehery, J.D.Johnston, L.v.d.Kerkhof,
E.F.Schroeder: "The ISO/MPEG-Audio Codec: A Generic Standard for Coding
of High Quality Digital Audio",
92nd. AES-convention, Vienna 1992, preprint 3336
from Jutta Degener <jutta@cs.tu-berlin.de> and Carsten Bormann
<cabo@cs.tu-berlin.de>:
GSM 06.10 13 kbit/s RPE/LTP speech compression available
--------------------------------------------------------
The Communications and Operating Systems Research Group (KBS) at the
Technische Universitaet Berlin is currently working on a set of
UNIX-based tools for computer-mediated telecooperation that will be
made freely available.
As part of this effort we are publishing an implementation of the
European GSM 06.10 provisional standard for full-rate speech
transcoding, prI-ETS 300 036, which uses RPE/LTP (residual pulse
excitation/long term prediction) coding at 13 kbit/s.
GSM 06.10 compresses frames of 160 13-bit samples (8 kHz sampling
rate, i.e. a frame rate of 50 Hz) into 260 bits; for compatibility
with typical UNIX applications, our implementation turns frames of 160
16-bit linear samples into 33-byte frames (1650 Bytes/s).
The quality of the algorithm is good enough for reliable speaker
recognition; even music often survives transcoding in recognizable
form (given the bandwidth limitations of 8 kHz sampling rate).
Version 1.0 of the implementation is available per anonymous ftp from
ftp.cs.tu-berlin.de in the directory /pub/local/kbs/tubmik/gsm/ ;
more information about the library can be found on the World-Wide Web
at http://www.cs.tu-berlin.de/~jutta/toast.html .
Questions and bug reports should be directed to jutta@cs.tu-berlin.de
and cabo@informatik.uni-bremen.de .
from Bob Kimball <rkimball@qualcomm.com>:
I work for Qualcomm Inc. and we are designing a digital cellular telephone
system. Our phone uses our variable rate vocoder (QCELP) which is designed
for speach and compresses 64Kb/s speach to 8Kb/s through 1Kb/s with 8Kb/s
being full rate and 1Kb/s for 1/8 rate speach. It works great for speach.
The QCELP process is documented in our Common Air Interface (CAI) which is
available for anonymous ftp from lorien.qualcomm.com in /pub/cdma
each chapter is a postscript file. The vocoder is described in appendix A.
The whole document is quite large. This is the document which is currently
going through the TIA standard committee so it is not a final version. The
appendix on the vocoder should be almost identical to the final version...
whenever that comes out.
from Nicola Ferioli <ser1509@cdc835.cdc.polimi.it>:
ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/sound/vocpak20.zip
Lossless 8-bit sound file compressor
VOCPACK is a compressor/decompressor for 8-bit digital sound using a
lossless algorithm; it is useful to save disk space without degrading
sound quality. It can compress signed and unsigned data, sampled at any
rate, mono or stereo. Since the method used is not lossy, it isn't
necessary to strip file headers before compressing.
VOCPACK was developed for use with .VOC (SoundBlaster) and .WAV (Windows)
files, but any 8-bit sound can be compressed since the program takes no
assumptions about the file structure.
The typical compression ratio obtained goes from 0,8 for files sampled at
11 KHz to 0,4 for 44 Khz files. The best results are obtained with 44 KHz
sounds (mono or stereo): general-purpose archivers create files that can be
twice longer than the output of VOCPACK. You can obtain smaller values
using lossy compressors but if your goal is to keep the sound quality
unaltered you should use a lossless program like VOCPACK.
from Harald Popp <popp@iis.fhg.de>:
new version 1.0 of ISO/MPEG1 Audio Layer 3 Shareware available
major improvements of the new version:
- encoder works twice as fast
- improved file handling for encoder including .WAV files
You may download the shareware from fhginfo.fhg.de (153.96.1.4)
from the directory /pub/layer3
The source code for the MPEG1 audio decoder layer 1, 2 and 3 is
now available on fhginfo.fhg.de (153.96.1.4) in /pub/layer3/public_c.
There are two files:
mpeg1_iis.tar.Z (Unix: lines seperated by line feed only)
mpeg1iis.zip (PC: lines seperated by carriage return and line feed)
For more information about this product and MPEG Audio Layer 3, see
the document "Informations about MPEG Audio Layer-3" maintained by
Juergen Zeller <zeller@iis.fhg.de>, available in
ftp://fhginfo.fhg.de/pub/layer3/MPEG_Audio_L3_FAQ.html
from Monty <xiphmont@athena.mit.edu>:
A beta release of the OggSquish audio compression/decompression utility is
available at http://deskfish.cs.titech.ac.jp:8001/squish/squish_index.html
OggSquish is a compression package designed to reduce the file size of
digitized 8 and 16 bit audio samples (or samples of any periodic
data). OggSquish will operate on files sampled at any speed, but it is
designed to work with very high quality samples, for example, CD
quality samples.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [30] My archive is corrupted!
The two most common reasons for this are
(1) failing to use the magic word "tenex" (when connected to SIMTEL20 and
other TOPS20 systems) or "binary" (when connected to UNIX systems) when
transferring the file from an ftp site to your host machine. The
reasons for this are technical and boring. A synonym for "tenex" is
"type L 8", in case your ftp doesn't know what "tenex" means.
(2) failing to use an eight-bit binary transfer protocol when transferring
the file from the host to your PC. Make sure to set the transfer type
to "binary" on both your host machine and your PC.
gopher is also known to corrupt binary files. In particular, if gzip
complains about a multi-part file, it's likely that the .gz file
has been corrupted by gopher. Use ftp in binary mode instead.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [31] pkunzip reports a CRC error!
The portable zip 1.1 contains many workarounds for undocumented restrictions
in pkunzip. Compatibility is ensured for pkunzip 1.10 only. All previous
versions (pkunzip 1.0x) have too many bugs and cannot be supported. This
includes Borland unzip.
So if your pkunzip reports a CRC error, check that you are not using
an obsolete version. Get either pkzip 2.04g or unzip 5.12 (see question
2 above for ftp sites). To generate zip files compatible with pkunzip 1.10,
use zip 1.1 (see item 2 above for ftp site).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [32] VMS zip is not compatible with pkzip!
The problem is most likely in the file transfer program.
Many use kermit to transfer zipped files between PC and VMS VAX. The
following VMS kermit settings make VMS-ZIP compatible with PKZIP:
VMS kermit PC kermit
--------------- --------------
Uploading PKZIPped file to be UNZIPped: set fi ty fixed set fi ty bi
Downloading ZIPped file to be PKUNZIPped: set fi ty block set fi ty bi
If you are not using kermit, transfer a file created by pkzip on MSDOS
to VMS, transfer it back to your PC and check that pkunzip can extract it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [33] I have a problem with Stacker or DoubleSpace!
The newsgroup comp.compression is *not* the appropriate place to
discuss about one specific program on one specific operating system.
Since you have bought a legal copy of Stacker or MSDOS 6.x, you have
the documentation of your product; please read it. If you can't find
the answer in the documentation, please report the problem to the Stac
or Microsoft customer support. (For Stac, use one of StacTec@aol.com,
StacMacTec@aol.com or StacOS2tec@aol.com.) If you really feel that the
net has to know about your problem, please post in one of the MSDOS
newsgroups, such as comp.os.msdos.apps or comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [50] What is this 'tar' compression program?
tar is not a compression program. It just combines several files
into one, without compressing them. tar file are often compressed with
'compress', resulting in a .tar.Z file. See question 2, file type .tar.Z.
GNU tar has the capability to (de)compress files as well.
When you have to archive a lot of very small files, it is often
preferable to create a single .tar file and compress it, than to
compress the individual files separately. The compression program can
thus take advantage of redundancy between separate files. The
disadvantage is that you must uncompress the whole .tar file to
extract any member. You can also improve compression by grouping
files by type, as in:
tar cvf - `ls | sort -t. +1` | gzip > file.tar.gz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [51] I need a CRC algorithm
As its name implies (Cyclic Redundancy Check) a crc adds redundancy whereas
the topic of this group is to remove it. Yet this question comes up often in
comp.compression.
The file ftp://ftp.rocksoft.com/clients/rocksoft/papers/crc_v3.txt is a pretty
comprehensive description of the whole CRC concept, including a C program.
See also:
- Schwaderer W.D., "CRC Calculation", April 85 PC Tech Journal, pp.118-133.
- "Calculating CRCs by Bits and Bytes", BYTE Magazine, September 1986
- Ramabadran T.V., Gaitonde S.S., "A tutorial on CRC computations", IEEE
Micro, Aug 1988.
- ftp://ftp.uni-erlangen.de/pub/doc/ISO/english/async-HDLC
- the source of all archivers, such as the file makecrc.c in the Info-ZIP
sources (see extension .zip in item 2)
The following C code (by Rob Warnock <rpw3@sgi.com>) does CRC-32 in
BigEndian/BigEndian byte/bit order. That is, the data is sent most
significant byte first, and each of the bits within a byte is sent most
significant bit first, as in FDDI. You will need to twiddle with it to do
Ethernet CRC, i.e., BigEndian/LittleEndian byte/bit order. [Left as an
exercise for the reader.]
The CRCs this code generates agree with the vendor-supplied Verilog models
of several of the popular FDDI "MAC" chips.
u_long crc32_table[256];
/* Initialized first time "crc32()" is called. If you prefer, you can
* statically initialize it at compile time. [Another exercise.]
*/
u_long crc32(u_char *buf, int len)
{
u_char *p;
u_long crc;
if (!crc32_table[1]) /* if not already done, */
init_crc32(); /* build table */
crc = 0xffffffff; /* preload shift register, per CRC-32 spec */
for (p = buf; len > 0; ++p, --len)
crc = (crc << 8) ^ crc32_table[(crc >> 24) ^ *p];
return ~crc; /* transmit complement, per CRC-32 spec */
}
/*
* Build auxiliary table for parallel byte-at-a-time CRC-32.
*/
#define CRC32_POLY 0x04c11db7 /* AUTODIN II, Ethernet, & FDDI */
init_crc32()
{
int i, j;
u_long c;
for (i = 0; i < 256; ++i) {
for (c = i << 24, j = 8; j > 0; --j)
c = c & 0x80000000 ? (c << 1) ^ CRC32_POLY : (c << 1);
crc32_table[i] = c;
}
}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [52] What about those people who continue to ask frequently asked
questions in spite of the frequently asked questions document?
Just send them a polite mail message, referring them to this document.
There is no need to flame them on comp.compression. That would just
add more noise to this group. Posted answers that are in the FAQ are
just as annoying as posted questions that are in the FAQ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [53] Where are FAQ lists archived?
Many are crossposted to news.answers. That newsgroup should have a
long expiry time at your site; if not, talk to your sysadmin.
FAQ lists are available by anonymous FTP from rtfm.mit.edu.
The comp.compression FAQ that you are reading is in directory
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/
This FAQ is also accessible in the World Wide Web at
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/compression-faq/top.html
or http://www.cs.ruu.nl/wais/html/na-dir/compression-faq/.html
If you don't have FTP access, you can access the archives by mail
server. Send an email message to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu
containing the commands
send usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/part1
send usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/part2
send usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/part3
For instructions, send an email message to the same address with the
words "help" and "index" (no quotes) on separate lines. If you don't
get a reply, check your return address, or add a line such as
path myname@foo.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [54] I need specs for graphics formats
Get the book by Murray & vanRyper "Encyclopedia of graphics file formats",
O'Reilly & associates, ISBN 1-56592-058-9. Or have a look in directory
/pub/graphics.formats on zamenhof.cs.rice.edu; it contains descriptions of
gif, tiff, fits, etc...
See also the comp.graphics FAQ and the Graphics Formats FAQ. The latter is in
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/graphics/fileformats-faq/
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/graphics/fileformats-faq/top.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [55] Where can I find Lenna and other images?
The Waterloo BragZone (http://links.uwaterloo.ca/bragzone.base.html
or ftp://links.uwaterloo.ca:/pub/BragZone/ ) compares the results of
various image compression schemes against a 32 element test suite.
Sample images are available.
The Computer Vision Home Page has many links to test images in
http://www.cs.cmu.edu:80/afs/cs/project/cil/ftp/html/v-images.html
A bunch of standard images (lenna, baboon, cameraman, crowd, moon
etc..) used to be in ftp://eedsp.gatech.edu/database/images . The
images are in 256-level grayshades (256x256 pixels, 256 "colors").
[Note: the site ipl.rpi.edu mentioned below keeps changing. Images
stay there for a while then disappear. They are again available at
the time of writing (27 Dec 93).]
The site ipl.rpi.edu (128.113.14.50) has standard images in two
directories:
ftp://ipl.rpi.edu/pub/image/still/usc
ftp://ipl.rpi.edu/pub/image/still/canon
(The directory /pub/image/sequence was taken offline because of
possible copyright problems, but has come back again. In particular,
Miss America is in subdirectories of /pub/image/sequence/missa.)
In each of those directories are (usually) the following directories:
bgr - 24 bit blue, green, red
color - 24 bit red, green, blue
gray - 8 bit grayscale uniform weighted
gray601 - 8 bit grayscale CCIR-601 weighted
And in these directories are the actual images.
For example, the popular lena image is in
ftp://ipl.rpi.edu/pub/image/still/usc/bgr/lena # 24 bit BGR
ftp://ipl.rpi.edu/pub/image/still/usc/gray/lena-y.ras # 8 bit gray
All of the images are in Sun rasterfile format. You can use the pbm
utilities to convert them to whatever format is most convenient.
[pbm is available in ftp://ftp.ee.lbl.gov/pbmplus*.tar.Z ].
Questions about the ipl archive should be sent to help@ipl.rpi.edu.
There are few gray-scale still images and some raw data of test results
available in directory ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/graphics/misc/test-images/
There are lots of .gif images in ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/pics/
Medical images can be found in:
ftp://decaf.stanford.edu/pub/images/medical/mri
ftp://eedsp.gatech.edu/database/images/wchung/medical
ftp://omicron.cs.unc.edu/pub/projects/softlab/CHVRTD
The WWW address for the National Library of Medicine is http://www.nlm.nih.gov
A list of health and medical related Internet resources is available ftp://in
ftp.sura.net/pub/nic/HealthResources/medical.resources.3-94
Rodney Peck <rodney@balltown.cma.com> is interested in some method
of establishing a canonical ftp database of images but does not have
the resources to provide an ftp site for that database. Send suggestions to
rodney@balltown.cma.com.
Beware: the same image often comes in many different forms, at
different resolutions, etc... The original lenna image is 512 wide,
512 high, 8 bits per pel, red, green and blue fields. Gray-scale
versions of Lenna have been obtained in two different ways from the
original:
(1) Using the green field as a gray-scale image, and
(2) Doing an RGB->YUV transformation and saving the Y component.
Method (1) makes it easier to compare different people's results since
everyone's version should be the same using that method. Method (2)
produces a more correct image.
For the curious: 'lena' or 'lenna' is a digitized Playboy centerfold, from
November 1972. (Lenna is the spelling in Playboy, Lena is the Swedish spelling
of the name.) Lena Soderberg (ne Sjooblom) was last reported living in her
native Sweden, happily married with three kids and a job with the state liquor
monopoly. In 1988, she was interviewed by some Swedish computer related
publication, and she was pleasantly amused by what had happened to her
picture. That was the first she knew of the use of that picture in the
computer business. A scan of the original Lenna from Playboy is available at
http://www.isr.com/~chuck/lenna.html
The editorial in the January 1992 issue of Optical Engineering (v. 31 no. 1)
details how Playboy has finally caught on to the fact that their copyright on
Lena Sjooblom's photo is being widely infringed. It sounds as if you will
have to get permission from Playboy to publish it in the future.
The CCITT (ITU-T) test images are in ftp://ftp.cs.waikato.ac.nz/pub/ccitt/
and http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/~singlis/ccitt.html
[The images in ftp://nic.funet.fi/pub/graphics/misc/test-images/ccitt*.tif are
corrupted.] This set is commonly used to compare binary image compression
techniques. The images are 1728x2376 pixels.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [56] I am looking for a message digest algorithm
Look on the ftp site rsa.com, in directory /pub. MD4 and MD5 are there.
This question would be more appropriate on sci.crypt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [57] I have lost my password on a .zip file
This question would be more appropriate on sci.crypt.
Try the following:
ftp://idea.sec.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/code/zipcrack.c.gz
ftp://idea.sec.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/rpub.cl.msu.edu/crypt/msdos/zipcrack*
ftp://idea.sec.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/rpub.cl.msu.edu/crypt/other/zipcrack.c
ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/cryptanalysis/fzc100.zip
ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/cryptanalysis/pkcrack.zip
ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/cryptanalysis/zipcrk20.zip
These are brute force crackers. A known plaintext attack is also possible,
see http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~conrad/krypto/pkcrack.html
or ftp://ripem.msu.edu/pub/crypt/docs/kocher-pkzip-attack.ps.gz
End of part 1 of the comp.compression faq.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Path: news1.ucsd.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!Germany.EU.net!main.Germany.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!jloup
From: gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu (Jean-loup Gailly)
Newsgroups: comp.compression,comp.compression.research,news.answers,comp.answers
Subject: comp.compression Frequently Asked Questions (part 2/3)
Supersedes: <compr2_20aug96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Followup-To: comp.compression
Date: 20 Sep 1996 13:11:40 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 2066
Approved: news-answers-request@mit.edu
Distribution: world
Expires: 15 Nov 1996 16:17:20 GMT
Message-ID: <compr2_20sep96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
References: <compr1_20sep96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Reply-To: gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Summary: *** READ THIS BEFORE POSTING ***
Keywords: data compression, FAQ
Originator: jloup@spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Xref: news1.ucsd.edu comp.compression:23972 comp.compression.research:2004 news.answers:65424 comp.answers:16346
Archive-name: compression-faq/part2
Last-modified: Sep 20th, 1996
This file is part 2 of a set of Frequently Asked Questions for the
groups comp.compression and comp.compression.research.
If you did not get part 1 or 3, you can get them at
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/compression-faq/top.html
or ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/
If you don't want to see this FAQ regularly, please add the subject
line to your kill file. If you have corrections or suggestions for
this FAQ, send them to Jean-loup Gailly <gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu>. Thank you.
Contents
========
Part 2: (Long) introductions to data compression techniques
[70] Introduction to data compression (long)
Huffman and Related Compression Techniques
Arithmetic Coding
Substitutional Compressors
The LZ78 family of compressors
The LZ77 family of compressors
[71] Introduction to MPEG (long)
What is MPEG?
Does it have anything to do with JPEG?
Then what's JBIG and MHEG?
What has MPEG accomplished?
So how does MPEG I work?
What about the audio compression?
So how much does it compress?
What's phase II?
When will all this be finished?
How do I join MPEG?
How do I get the documents, like the MPEG I draft?
[72] What is wavelet theory?
[73] What is the theoretical compression limit?
[74] Introduction to JBIG
[75] Introduction to JPEG
[76] What is Vector Quantization?
[77] Introduction to Fractal compression
[78] The Burrows-Wheeler block sorting algorithm (long)
Part 3: (Long) list of image compression hardware
[85] Image compression hardware
[99] Acknowledgments
Search for "Subject: [#]" to get to question number # quickly. Some news
readers can also take advantage of the message digest format used here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [70] Introduction to data compression (long)
Written by Peter Gutmann <pgut1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz>.
Huffman and Related Compression Techniques
------------------------------------------
*Huffman compression* is a statistical data compression technique which
gives a reduction in the average code length used to represent the symbols of
a alphabet. The Huffman code is an example of a code which is optimal in the
case where all symbols probabilities are integral powers of 1/2. A Huffman
code can be built in the following manner:
(1) Rank all symbols in order of probability of occurrence.
(2) Successively combine the two symbols of the lowest probability to form
a new composite symbol; eventually we will build a binary tree where
each node is the probability of all nodes beneath it.
(3) Trace a path to each leaf, noticing the direction at each node.
For a given frequency distribution, there are many possible Huffman codes,
but the total compressed length will be the same. It is possible to
define a 'canonical' Huffman tree, that is, pick one of these alternative
trees. Such a canonical tree can then be represented very compactly, by
transmitting only the bit length of each code. This technique is used
in most archivers (pkzip, lha, zoo, arj, ...).
A technique related to Huffman coding is *Shannon-Fano coding*, which
works as follows:
(1) Divide the set of symbols into two equal or almost equal subsets
based on the probability of occurrence of characters in each
subset. The first subset is assigned a binary zero, the second
a binary one.
(2) Repeat step (1) until all subsets have a single element.
The algorithm used to create the Huffman codes is bottom-up, and the
one for the Shannon-Fano codes is top-down. Huffman encoding always
generates optimal codes, Shannon-Fano sometimes uses a few more bits.
Arithmetic Coding
-----------------
It would appear that Huffman or Shannon-Fano coding is the perfect
means of compressing data. However, this is *not* the case. As
mentioned above, these coding methods are optimal when and only when
the symbol probabilities are integral powers of 1/2, which is usually
not the case.
The technique of *arithmetic coding* does not have this restriction:
It achieves the same effect as treating the message as one single unit
(a technique which would, for Huffman coding, require enumeration of
every single possible message), and thus attains the theoretical
entropy bound to compression efficiency for any source.
Arithmetic coding works by representing a number by an interval of real
numbers between 0 and 1. As the message becomes longer, the interval needed
to represent it becomes smaller and smaller, and the number of bits needed to
specify that interval increases. Successive symbols in the message reduce
this interval in accordance with the probability of that symbol. The more
likely symbols reduce the range by less, and thus add fewer bits to the
message.
1 Codewords
+-----------+-----------+-----------+ /-----\
| |8/9 YY | Detail |<- 31/32 .11111
| +-----------+-----------+<- 15/16 .1111
| Y | | too small |<- 14/16 .1110
|2/3 | YX | for text |<- 6/8 .110
+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| | |16/27 XYY |<- 10/16 .1010
| | +-----------+
| | XY | |
| | | XYX |<- 4/8 .100
| |4/9 | |
| +-----------+-----------+
| | | |
| X | | XXY |<- 3/8 .011
| | |8/27 |
| | +-----------+
| | XX | |
| | | |<- 1/4 .01
| | | XXX |
| | | |
|0 | | |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+
As an example of arithmetic coding, lets consider the example of two
symbols X and Y, of probabilities 0.66 and 0.33. To encode this message, we
examine the first symbol: If it is a X, we choose the lower partition; if
it is a Y, we choose the upper partition. Continuing in this manner for
three symbols, we get the codewords shown to the right of the diagram above
- they can be found by simply taking an appropriate location in the
interval for that particular set of symbols and turning it into a binary
fraction. In practice, it is also necessary to add a special end-of-data
symbol, which is not represented in this simpe example.
In this case the arithmetic code is not completely efficient, which is due
to the shortness of the message - with longer messages the coding efficiency
does indeed approach 100%.
Now that we have an efficient encoding technique, what can we do with it?
What we need is a technique for building a model of the data which we can
then use with the encoder. The simplest model is a fixed one, for example a
table of standard letter frequencies for English text which we can then use
to get letter probabilities. An improvement on this technique is to use an
*adaptive model*, in other words a model which adjusts itself to the data
which is being compressed as the data is compressed. We can convert the
fixed model into an adaptive one by adjusting the symbol frequencies after
each new symbol is encoded, allowing the model to track the data being
transmitted. However, we can do much better than that.
Using the symbol probabilities by themselves is not a particularly good
estimate of the true entropy of the data: We can take into account
intersymbol probabilities as well. The best compressors available today
take this approach: DMC (Dynamic Markov Coding) starts with a zero-order
Markov model and gradually extends this initial model as compression
progresses; PPM (Prediction by Partial Matching) looks for a match of the
text to be compressed in an order-n context. If no match is found, it
drops to an order n-1 context, until it reaches order 0. Both these
techniques thus obtain a much better model of the data to be compressed,
which, combined with the use of arithmetic coding, results in superior
compression performance.
So if arithmetic coding-based compressors are so powerful, why are they not
used universally? Apart from the fact that they are relatively new and
haven't come into general use too much yet, there is also one major concern:
The fact that they consume rather large amounts of computing resources, both
in terms of CPU power and memory. The building of sophisticated models for
the compression can chew through a fair amount of memory (especially in the
case of DMC, where the model can grow without bounds); and the arithmetic
coding itself involves a fair amount of number crunching.
There is however an alternative approach, a class of compressors generally
referred to as *substitutional* or *dictionary-based compressors*.
Substitutional Compressors
--------------------------
The basic idea behind a substitutional compressor is to replace an
occurrence of a particular phrase or group of bytes in a piece of data with a
reference to a previous occurrence of that phrase. There are two main
classes of schemes, named after Jakob Ziv and Abraham Lempel, who first
proposed them in 1977 and 1978.
<The LZ78 family of compressors>
LZ78-based schemes work by entering phrases into a *dictionary* and then,
when a repeat occurrence of that particular phrase is found, outputting the
dictionary index instead of the phrase. There exist several compression
algorithms based on this principle, differing mainly in the manner in which
they manage the dictionary. The most well-known scheme (in fact the most
well-known of all the Lempel-Ziv compressors, the one which is generally (and
mistakenly) referred to as "Lempel-Ziv Compression"), is Terry Welch's LZW
scheme, which he designed in 1984 for implementation in hardware for high-
performance disk controllers.
Input string: /WED/WE/WEE/WEB
Character input: Code output: New code value and associated string:
/W / 256 = /W
E W 257 = WE
D E 258 = ED
/ D 259 = D/
WE 256 260 = /WE
/ E 261 = E/
WEE 260 262 = /WEE
/W 261 263 = E/W
EB 257 264 = WEB
<END> B
LZW starts with a 4K dictionary, of which entries 0-255 refer to individual
bytes, and entries 256-4095 refer to substrings. Each time a new code is
generated it means a new string has been parsed. New strings are generated
by appending the current character K to the end of an existing string w. The
algorithm for LZW compression is as follows:
set w = NIL
loop
read a character K
if wK exists in the dictionary
w = wK
else
output the code for w
add wK to the string table
w = K
endloop
A sample run of LZW over a (highly redundant) input string can be seen in
the diagram above. The strings are built up character-by-character starting
with a code value of 256. LZW decompression takes the stream of codes and
uses it to exactly recreate the original input data. Just like the
compression algorithm, the decompressor adds a new string to the dictionary
each time it reads in a new code. All it needs to do in addition is to
translate each incoming code into a string and send it to the output. A
sample run of the LZW decompressor is shown in below.
Input code: /WED<256>E<260><261><257>B
Input code: Output string: New code value and associated string:
/ /
W W 256 = /W
E E 257 = WE
D D 258 = ED
256 /W 259 = D/
E E 260 = /WE
260 /WE 261 = E/
261 E/ 262 = /WEE
257 WE 263 = E/W
B B 264 = WEB
The most remarkable feature of this type of compression is that the entire
dictionary has been transmitted to the decoder without actually explicitly
transmitting the dictionary. At the end of the run, the decoder will have a
dictionary identical to the one the encoder has, built up entirely as part of
the decoding process.
LZW is more commonly encountered today in a variant known as LZC, after
its use in the UNIX "compress" program. In this variant, pointers do not
have a fixed length. Rather, they start with a length of 9 bits, and then
slowly grow to their maximum possible length once all the pointers of a
particular size have been used up. Furthermore, the dictionary is not frozen
once it is full as for LZW - the program continually monitors compression
performance, and once this starts decreasing the entire dictionary is
discarded and rebuilt from scratch. More recent schemes use some sort of
least-recently-used algorithm to discard little-used phrases once the
dictionary becomes full rather than throwing away the entire dictionary.
Finally, not all schemes build up the dictionary by adding a single new
character to the end of the current phrase. An alternative technique is to
concatenate the previous two phrases (LZMW), which results in a faster
buildup of longer phrases than the character-by-character buildup of the
other methods. The disadvantage of this method is that a more sophisticated
data structure is needed to handle the dictionary.
[A good introduction to LZW, MW, AP and Y coding is given in the yabba
package. For ftp information, see question 2 in part one, file type .Y]
<The LZ77 family of compressors>
LZ77-based schemes keep track of the last n bytes of data seen, and when a
phrase is encountered that has already been seen, they output a pair of
values corresponding to the position of the phrase in the previously-seen
buffer of data, and the length of the phrase. In effect the compressor moves
a fixed-size *window* over the data (generally referred to as a *sliding
window*), with the position part of the (position, length) pair referring to
the position of the phrase within the window. The most commonly used
algorithms are derived from the LZSS scheme described by James Storer and
Thomas Szymanski in 1982. In this the compressor maintains a window of size
N bytes and a *lookahead buffer* the contents of which it tries to find a
match for in the window:
while( lookAheadBuffer not empty )
{
get a pointer ( position, match ) to the longest match in the window
for the lookahead buffer;
if( length > MINIMUM_MATCH_LENGTH )
{
output a ( position, length ) pair;
shift the window length characters along;
}
else
{
output the first character in the lookahead buffer;
shift the window 1 character along;
}
}
Decompression is simple and fast: Whenever a ( position, length ) pair is
encountered, go to that ( position ) in the window and copy ( length ) bytes
to the output.
Sliding-window-based schemes can be simplified by numbering the input text
characters mod N, in effect creating a circular buffer. The sliding window
approach automatically creates the LRU effect which must be done explicitly in
LZ78 schemes. Variants of this method apply additional compression to the
output of the LZSS compressor, which include a simple variable-length code
(LZB), dynamic Huffman coding (LZH), and Shannon-Fano coding (ZIP 1.x)), all
of which result in a certain degree of improvement over the basic scheme,
especially when the data are rather random and the LZSS compressor has little
effect.
Recently an algorithm was developed which combines the ideas behind LZ77 and
LZ78 to produce a hybrid called LZFG. LZFG uses the standard sliding window,
but stores the data in a modified trie data structure and produces as output
the position of the text in the trie. Since LZFG only inserts complete
*phrases* into the dictionary, it should run faster than other LZ77-based
compressors.
All popular archivers (arj, lha, zip, zoo) are variations on the LZ77 theme.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [71] Introduction to MPEG (long)
For MPEG players, see item 15 in part 1 of the FAQ. Frank Gadegast
<phade@cs.tu-berlin.de> also posts a FAQ specialized in MPEG, available in
ftp://ftp.cs.tu-berlin.de/pub/msdos/dos/graphics/mpegfa*.zip and
http://www.powerweb.de/mpeg/mpegfaq/
The site ftp.crs4.it dedicated to the MPEG compression standard,
see the directory mpeg and subdirectories. Another MPEG FAQ is available
in http://www.crs4.it/~luigi/MPEG/mpegfaq.html
See also http://www-plateau.cs.berkeley.edu/mpeg
A description of MPEG can be found in: "MPEG: A Video Compression
Standard for Multimedia Applications" Didier Le Gall, Communications
of the ACM, April 1991, Vol 34. No.4, pp.46-58.
The MPEG book (ISBN 0-442-01920-3) was originally scheduled for August
1994 by Van Nostrand publishing (phone 800-842-3636) then later for
December 1995 (anyone got more recent info?).
MPEG-2 bitstreams are available on wuarchive.wustl.edu in directory
/graphics/x3l3/pub/bitstreams. MPEG-2 Demultiplexer source code is
in /graphics/x3l3/pub/bitstreams/systems/munsi_v13.tar.gz
Public C source encoder for all 3 layers for mpeg2 including mpeg1 is in
ftp://ftp.tnt.uni-hannover.de/pub/MPEG/audio/mpeg2/public_software/
technical_report/dist08.tar.gz
Introduction to MPEG originally written by Mark Adler
<madler@cco.caltech.edu> around January 1992; modified and updated by
Harald Popp <layer3@iis.fhg.de> in March 94:
Q: What is MPEG, exactly?
A: MPEG is the "Moving Picture Experts Group", working under the
joint direction of the International Standards Organization (ISO)
and the International Electro-Technical Commission (IEC). This
group works on standards for the coding of moving pictures and
associated audio.
Q: What is the status of MPEG's work, then? What's about MPEG-1, -2,
and so on?
A: MPEG approaches the growing need for multimedia standards step-by-
step. Today, three "phases" are defined:
MPEG-1: "Coding of Moving Pictures and Associated Audio for
Digital Storage Media at up to about 1.5 MBit/s"
Status: International Standard IS-11172, completed in 10.92
MPEG-2: "Generic Coding of Moving Pictures and Associated Audio"
Status: Comittee Draft CD 13818 as found in documents MPEG93 /
N601, N602, N603 (11.93)
MPEG-3: no longer exists (has been merged into MPEG-2)
MPEG-4: "Very Low Bitrate Audio-Visual Coding"
Status: Call for Proposals 11.94, Working Draft in 11.96
Q: MPEG-1 is ready-for-use. How does the standard look like?
A: MPEG-1 consists of 4 parts:
IS 11172-1: System
describes synchronization and multiplexing of video and audio
IS 11172-2: Video
describes compression of non-interlaced video signals
IS 11172-3: Audio
describes compression of audio signals
CD 11172-4: Compliance Testing
describes procedures for determining the characteristics of coded
bitstreams and the decoding porcess and for testing compliance
with the requirements stated in the other parts
Q. Does MPEG have anything to do with JPEG?
A. Well, it sounds the same, and they are part of the same
subcommittee of ISO along with JBIG and MHEG, and they usually meet
at the same place at the same time. However, they are different
sets of people with few or no common individual members, and they
have different charters and requirements. JPEG is for still image
compression.
Q. Then what's JBIG and MHEG?
A. Sorry I mentioned them. Ok, I'll simply say that JBIG is for binary
image compression (like faxes), and MHEG is for multi-media data
standards (like integrating stills, video, audio, text, etc.).
For an introduction to JBIG, see question 74 below.
Q. So how does MPEG-1 work? Tell me about video coding!
A. First off, it starts with a relatively low resolution video
sequence (possibly decimated from the original) of about 352 by
240 frames by 30 frames/s (US--different numbers for Europe),
but original high (CD) quality audio. The images are in color,
but converted to YUV space, and the two chrominance channels
(U and V) are decimated further to 176 by 120 pixels. It turns
out that you can get away with a lot less resolution in those
channels and not notice it, at least in "natural" (not computer
generated) images.
The basic scheme is to predict motion from frame to frame in the
temporal direction, and then to use DCT's (discrete cosine
transforms) to organize the redundancy in the spatial directions.
The DCT's are done on 8x8 blocks, and the motion prediction is
done in the luminance (Y) channel on 16x16 blocks. In other words,
given the 16x16 block in the current frame that you are trying to
code, you look for a close match to that block in a previous or
future frame (there are backward prediction modes where later
frames are sent first to allow interpolating between frames).
The DCT coefficients (of either the actual data, or the difference
between this block and the close match) are "quantized", which
means that you divide them by some value to drop bits off the
bottom end. Hopefully, many of the coefficients will then end up
being zero. The quantization can change for every "macroblock"
(a macroblock is 16x16 of Y and the corresponding 8x8's in both
U and V). The results of all of this, which include the DCT
coefficients, the motion vectors, and the quantization parameters
(and other stuff) is Huffman coded using fixed tables. The DCT
coefficients have a special Huffman table that is "two-dimensional"
in that one code specifies a run-length of zeros and the non-zero
value that ended the run. Also, the motion vectors and the DC
DCT components are DPCM (subtracted from the last one) coded.
Q. So is each frame predicted from the last frame?
A. No. The scheme is a little more complicated than that. There are
three types of coded frames. There are "I" or intra frames. They
are simply a frame coded as a still image, not using any past
history. You have to start somewhere. Then there are "P" or
predicted frames. They are predicted from the most recently
reconstructed I or P frame. (I'm describing this from the point
of view of the decompressor.) Each macroblock in a P frame can
either come with a vector and difference DCT coefficients for a
close match in the last I or P, or it can just be "intra" coded
(like in the I frames) if there was no good match.
Lastly, there are "B" or bidirectional frames. They are predicted
from the closest two I or P frames, one in the past and one in the
future. You search for matching blocks in those frames, and try
three different things to see which works best. (Now I have the
point of view of the compressor, just to confuse you.) You try
using the forward vector, the backward vector, and you try
averaging the two blocks from the future and past frames, and
subtracting that from the block being coded. If none of those work
well, you can intracode the block.
The sequence of decoded frames usually goes like:
IBBPBBPBBPBBIBBPBBPB...
Where there are 12 frames from I to I (for US and Japan anyway.)
This is based on a random access requirement that you need a
starting point at least once every 0.4 seconds or so. The ratio
of P's to B's is based on experience.
Of course, for the decoder to work, you have to send that first
P *before* the first two B's, so the compressed data stream ends
up looking like:
0xx312645...
where those are frame numbers. xx might be nothing (if this is
the true starting point), or it might be the B's of frames -2 and
-1 if we're in the middle of the stream somewhere.
You have to decode the I, then decode the P, keep both of those
in memory, and then decode the two B's. You probably display the
I while you're decoding the P, and display the B's as you're
decoding them, and then display the P as you're decoding the next
P, and so on.
Q. You've got to be kidding.
A. No, really!
Q. Hmm. Where did they get 352x240?
A. That derives from the CCIR-601 digital television standard which
is used by professional digital video equipment. It is (in the US)
720 by 243 by 60 fields (not frames) per second, where the fields
are interlaced when displayed. (It is important to note though
that fields are actually acquired and displayed a 60th of a second
apart.) The chrominance channels are 360 by 243 by 60 fields a
second, again interlaced. This degree of chrominance decimation
(2:1 in the horizontal direction) is called 4:2:2. The source
input format for MPEG I, called SIF, is CCIR-601 decimated by 2:1
in the horizontal direction, 2:1 in the time direction, and an
additional 2:1 in the chrominance vertical direction. And some
lines are cut off to make sure things divide by 8 or 16 where
needed.
Q. What if I'm in Europe?
A. For 50 Hz display standards (PAL, SECAM) change the number of lines
in a field from 243 or 240 to 288, and change the display rate to
50 fields/s or 25 frames/s. Similarly, change the 120 lines in
the decimated chrominance channels to 144 lines. Since 288*50 is
exactly equal to 240*60, the two formats have the same source data
rate.
Q. What will MPEG-2 do for video coding?
A. As I said, there is a considerable loss of quality in going from
CCIR-601 to SIF resolution. For entertainment video, it's simply
not acceptable. You want to use more bits and code all or almost
all the CCIR-601 data. From subjective testing at the Japan
meeting in November 1991, it seems that 4 MBits/s can give very
good quality compared to the original CCIR-601 material. The
objective of MPEG-2 is to define a bit stream optimized for
these resolutions and bit rates.
Q. Why not just scale up what you're doing with MPEG-1?
A. The main difficulty is the interlacing. The simplest way to extend
MPEG-1 to interlaced material is to put the fields together into
frames (720x486x30/s). This results in bad motion artifacts that
stem from the fact that moving objects are in different places
in the two fields, and so don't line up in the frames. Compressing
and decompressing without taking that into account somehow tends to
muddle the objects in the two different fields.
The other thing you might try is to code the even and odd field
streams separately. This avoids the motion artifacts, but as you
might imagine, doesn't get very good compression since you are not
using the redundancy between the even and odd fields where there
is not much motion (which is typically most of image).
Or you can code it as a single stream of fields. Or you can
interpolate lines. Or, etc. etc. There are many things you can
try, and the point of MPEG-2 is to figure out what works well.
MPEG-2 is not limited to consider only derivations of MPEG-1.
There were several non-MPEG-1-like schemes in the competition in
November, and some aspects of those algorithms may or may not
make it into the final standard for entertainment video
compression.
Q. So what works?
A. Basically, derivations of MPEG-1 worked quite well, with one that
used wavelet subband coding instead of DCT's that also worked very
well. Also among the worked-very-well's was a scheme that did not
use B frames at all, just I and P's. All of them, except maybe
one, did some sort of adaptive frame/field coding, where a decision
is made on a macroblock basis as to whether to code that one as
one frame macroblock or as two field macroblocks. Some other
aspects are how to code I-frames--some suggest predicting the even
field from the odd field. Or you can predict evens from evens and
odds or odds from evens and odds or any field from any other field,
etc.
Q. So what works?
A. Ok, we're not really sure what works best yet. The next step is
to define a "test model" to start from, that incorporates most of
the salient features of the worked-very-well proposals in a
simple way. Then experiments will be done on that test model,
making a mod at a time, and seeing what makes it better and what
makes it worse. Example experiments are, B's or no B's, DCT vs.
wavelets, various field prediction modes, etc. The requirements,
such as implementation cost, quality, random access, etc. will all
feed into this process as well.
Q. When will all this be finished?
A. I don't know. I'd have to hope in about a year or less.
Q: Talking about MPEG audio coding, I heard a lot about "Layer 1, 2
and 3". What does it mean, exactly?
A: MPEG-1, IS 11172-3, describes the compression of audio signals
using high performance perceptual coding schemes. It specifies a
family of three audio coding schemes, simply called Layer-1,-2,-3,
with increasing encoder complexity and performance (sound quality
per bitrate). The three codecs are compatible in a hierarchical
way, i.e. a Layer-N decoder is able to decode bitstream data
encoded in Layer-N and all Layers below N (e.g., a Layer-3
decoder may accept Layer-1,-2 and -3, whereas a Layer-2 decoder
may accept only Layer-1 and -2.)
Q: So we have a family of three audio coding schemes. What does the
MPEG standard define, exactly?
A: For each Layer, the standard specifies the bitstream format and
the decoder. To allow for future improvements, it does *not*
specify the encoder , but an informative chapter gives an example
for an encoder for each Layer.
Q: What have the three audio Layers in common?
A: All Layers use the same basic structure. The coding scheme can be
described as "perceptual noise shaping" or "perceptual subband /
transform coding".
The encoder analyzes the spectral components of the audio signal
by calculating a filterbank or transform and applies a
psychoacoustic model to estimate the just noticeable noise-
level. In its quantization and coding stage, the encoder tries
to allocate the available number of data bits in a way to meet
both the bitrate and masking requirements.
The decoder is much less complex. Its only task is to synthesize
an audio signal out of the coded spectral components.
All Layers use the same analysis filterbank (polyphase with 32
subbands). Layer-3 adds a MDCT transform to increase the frequency
resolution.
All Layers use the same "header information" in their bitstream,
to support the hierarchical structure of the standard.
All Layers use a bitstream structure that contains parts that are
more sensitive to biterrors ("header", "bit allocation",
"scalefactors", "side information") and parts that are less
sensitive ("data of spectral components").
All Layers may use 32, 44.1 or 48 kHz sampling frequency.
All Layers are allowed to work with similar bitrates:
Layer-1: from 32 kbps to 448 kbps
Layer-2: from 32 kbps to 384 kbps
Layer-3: from 32 kbps to 320 kbps
Q: What are the main differences between the three Layers, from a
global view?
A: From Layer-1 to Layer-3,
complexity increases (mainly true for the encoder),
overall codec delay increases, and
performance increases (sound quality per bitrate).
Q: Which Layer should I use for my application?
A: Good Question. Of course, it depends on all your requirements. But
as a first approach, you should consider the available bitrate of
your application as the Layers have been designed to support
certain areas of bitrates most efficiently, i.e. with a minimum
drop of sound quality.
Let us look a little closer at the strong domains of each Layer.
Layer-1: Its ISO target bitrate is 192 kbps per audio channel.
Layer-1 is a simplified version of Layer-2. It is most useful for
bitrates around the "high" bitrates around or above 192 kbps. A
version of Layer-1 is used as "PASC" with the DCC recorder.
Layer-2: Its ISO target bitrate is 128 kbps per audio channel.
Layer-2 is identical with MUSICAM. It has been designed as trade-
off between sound quality per bitrate and encoder complexity. It
is most useful for bitrates around the "medium" bitrates of 128 or
even 96 kbps per audio channel. The DAB (EU 147) proponents have
decided to use Layer-2 in the future Digital Audio Broadcasting
network.
Layer-3: Its ISO target bitrate is 64 kbps per audio channel.
Layer-3 merges the best ideas of MUSICAM and ASPEC. It has been
designed for best performance at "low" bitrates around 64 kbps or
even below. The Layer-3 format specifies a set of advanced
features that all address one goal: to preserve as much sound
quality as possible even at rather low bitrates. Today, Layer-3 is
already in use in various telecommunication networks (ISDN,
satellite links, and so on) and speech announcement systems.
Q: Tell me more about sound quality. How do you assess that?
A: Today, there is no alternative to expensive listening tests.
During the ISO-MPEG-1 process, 3 international listening tests
have been performed, with a lot of trained listeners, supervised
by Swedish Radio. They took place in 7.90, 3.91 and 11.91. Another
international listening test was performed by CCIR, now ITU-R, in
92.
All these tests used the "triple stimulus, hidden reference"
method and the CCIR impairment scale to assess the audio quality.
The listening sequence is "ABC", with A = original, BC = pair of
original / coded signal with random sequence, and the listener has
to evaluate both B and C with a number between 1.0 and 5.0. The
meaning of these values is:
5.0 = transparent (this should be the original signal)
4.0 = perceptible, but not annoying (first differences noticable)
3.0 = slightly annoying
2.0 = annoying
1.0 = very annoying
With perceptual codecs (like MPEG audio), all traditional
parameters (like SNR, THD+N, bandwidth) are especially useless.
Fraunhofer-IIS works on objective quality assessment tools, like
the NMR meter (Noise-to-Mask-Ratio), too. BTW: If you need more
informations about NMR, please contact nmr@iis.fhg.de.
Q: Now that I know how to assess quality, come on, tell me the
results of these tests.
A: Well, for low bitrates, the main result is that at 60 or 64 kbps
per channel), Layer-2 scored always between 2.1 and 2.6, whereas
Layer-3 scored between 3.6 and 3.8. This is a significant increase
in sound quality, indeed! Furthermore, the selection process for
critical sound material showed that it was rather difficult to
find worst-case material for Layer-3 whereas it was not so hard to
find such items for Layer-2.
Q: OK, a Layer-2 codec at low bitrates may sound poor today, but
couldn't that be improved in the future? I guess you just told me
before that the encoder is not fixed in the standard.
A: Good thinking! As the sound quality mainly depends on the encoder
implementation, it is true that there is no such thing as a "Layer-
N"- quality. So we definitely only know the performance of the
reference codecs during the international tests. Who knows what
will happen in the future? What we do know now, is:
Today, Layer-3 already provides a sound quality that comes very
near to CD quality at 64 kbps per channel. Layer-2 is far away
from that.
Tomorrow, both Layers may improve. Layer-2 has been designed as a
trade-off between quality and complexity, so the bitstream format
allows only limited innovations. In contrast, even the current
reference Layer-3-codec exploits only a small part of the powerful
mechanisms inside the Layer-3 bitstream format.
Q: All in all, you sound as if anybody should use Layer-3 for low
bitrates. Why on earth do some vendors still offer only Layer-2
equipment for these applications?
A: Well, maybe because they started to design and develop their
system rather early, e.g. in 1990. As Layer-2 is identical with
MUSICAM, it has been available since summer of 90, at latest. In
that year, Layer-3 development started and could be successfully
finished in spring 92. So, for a certain time, vendors could only
exploit the existing part of the new MPEG standard.
Now the situation has changed. All Layers are available, the
standard is completed, and new systems need not limit themselves,
but may capitalize on the full features of MPEG audio.
Q: How do I get the MPEG documents?
A: You may order it from your national standards body.
E.g., in Germany, please contact:
DIN-Beuth Verlag, Auslandsnormen
Mrs. Niehoff, Burggrafenstr. 6, D-10772 Berlin, Germany
Phone: 030-2601-2757, Fax: 030-2601-1231
E.g., in USA, you may order it from ANSI [phone (212) 642-4900] or
buy it from companies like OMNICOM phone +44 438 742424
FAX +44 438 740154
Q. How do I join MPEG?
A. You don't join MPEG. You have to participate in ISO as part of a
national delegation. How you get to be part of the national
delegation is up to each nation. I only know the U.S., where you
have to attend the corresponding ANSI meetings to be able to
attend the ISO meetings. Your company or institution has to be
willing to sink some bucks into travel since, naturally, these
meetings are held all over the world. (For example, Paris,
Santa Clara, Kurihama Japan, Singapore, Haifa Israel, Rio de
Janeiro, London, etc.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [72] What is wavelet theory?
Preprints and software are available by anonymous ftp from the
Yale Mathematics Department computer ftp://ceres.math.yale.edu/pub/wavelets/
and /pub/software/ .
For source code of several wavelet coders, see item 15 in part one of
this FAQ.
A list of pointers, covering theory, papers, books, implementations,
resources and more can be found at
http://www.amara.com/current/wavelet.html#Wavelinks
Bill Press of Harvard/CfA has made some things available on
ftp://cfata4.harvard.edu/pub/ There is a short TeX article on wavelet
theory (wavelet.tex, to be included in a future edition of Numerical
Recipes), some sample wavelet code (wavelet.f, in FORTRAN - sigh), and
a beta version of an astronomical image compression program which he
is currently developing (FITS format data files only, in
fitspress08.tar.Z).
The Rice Wavelet Toolbox Release 2.0 is available in
ftp://cml.rice.edu/pub/dsp/software/ and /pub/dsp/papers/ . This is a
collection of MATLAB of "mfiles" and "mex" files for twoband and
M-band filter bank/wavelet analysis from the DSP group and
Computational Mathematics Laboratory (CML) at Rice University,
Houston, TX. This release includes application code for Synthetic
Aperture Radar despeckling and for deblocking of JPEG decompressed
Images. Contact: Ramesh Gopinath <ramesh@rice.edu>.
A wavelet transform coder construction kit is available at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~gdavis/wavelet/wavelet.html
Contact: Geoff Davis <gdavis@cs.dartmouth.edu>
A mailing list dedicated to research on wavelets has been set up at the
University of South Carolina. To subscribe to this mailing list, send a
message with "subscribe" as the subject to wavelet@math.sc.edu.
For back issues and other information, check the Wavelet Digest home page
at http://www.wavelet.org/
A tutorial by M. Hilton, B. Jawerth, and A. Sengupta, entitled
"Compressing Still and Moving Images with Wavelets" is available in
ftp://ftp.math.sc.edu/pub/wavelet/papers/varia/tutorial/ . The
files are "tutorial.ps.Z" and "fig8.ps.Z". fig8 is a comparison of
JPEG and wavelet compressed images and could take several hours to
print. The tutorial is also available at
http://www.mathsoft.com/wavelets.html
A page on wavelet-based HARC-C compression technology is available at
http://www.harc.edu/HARCC.html
Commercial wavelet image compression software:
http://www.aware.com
http://www.summus.com
Details of the wavelet transform can be found in
ftp://ftp.isds.duke.edu/pub/brani/papers/wav4kidsA.ps.Z
ftp://ftp.isds.duke.edu/pub/brani/papers/wav4kidsB.ps.Z
A 5 minute course in wavelet transforms, by Richard Kirk <rak@crosfield.co.uk>:
Do you know what a Haar transform is? Its a transform to another orthonormal
space (like the DFT), but the basis functions are a set of square wave bursts
like this...
+--+ +------+
+ | +------------------ + | +--------------
+--+ +------+
+--+ +------+
------+ | +------------ --------------+ | +
+--+ +------+
+--+ +-------------+
------------+ | +------ + | +
+--+ +-------------+
+--+ +---------------------------+
------------------+ | + + +
+--+
This is the set of functions for an 8-element 1-D Haar transform. You
can probably see how to extend this to higher orders and higher dimensions
yourself. This is dead easy to calculate, but it is not what is usually
understood by a wavelet transform.
If you look at the eight Haar functions you see we have four functions
that code the highest resolution detail, two functions that code the
coarser detail, one function that codes the coarser detail still, and the
top function that codes the average value for the whole `image'.
Haar function can be used to code images instead of the DFT. With bilevel
images (such as text) the result can look better, and it is quicker to code.
Flattish regions, textures, and soft edges in scanned images get a nasty
`blocking' feel to them. This is obvious on hardcopy, but can be disguised on
color CRTs by the effects of the shadow mask. The DCT gives more consistent
results.
This connects up with another bit of maths sometimes called Multispectral
Image Analysis, sometimes called Image Pyramids.
Suppose you want to produce a discretely sampled image from a continuous
function. You would do this by effectively `scanning' the function using a
sinc function [ sin(x)/x ] `aperture'. This was proved by Shannon in the
`forties. You can do the same thing starting with a high resolution
discretely sampled image. You can then get a whole set of images showing
the edges at different resolutions by differencing the image at one
resolution with another version at another resolution. If you have made this
set of images properly they ought to all add together to give the original
image.
This is an expansion of data. Suppose you started off with a 1K*1K image.
You now may have a 64*64 low resolution image plus difference images at 128*128
256*256, 512*512 and 1K*1K.
Where has this extra data come from? If you look at the difference images you
will see there is obviously some redundancy as most of the values are near
zero. From the way we constructed the levels we know that locally the average
must approach zero in all levels but the top. We could then construct a set of
functions out of the sync functions at any level so that their total value
at all higher levels is zero. This gives us an orthonormal set of basis
functions for a transform. The transform resembles the Haar transform a bit,
but has symmetric wave pulses that decay away continuously in either direction
rather than square waves that cut off sharply. This transform is the
wavelet transform ( got to the point at last!! ).
These wavelet functions have been likened to the edge detecting functions
believed to be present in the human retina.
Loren I. Petrich <lip@s1.gov> adds that order 2 or 3 Daubechies
discrete wavelet transforms have a speed comparable to DCT's, and
usually achieve compression a factor of 2 better for the same image
quality than the JPEG 8*8 DCT. (See item 25 in part 1 of this FAQ for
references on fast DCT algorithms.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [73] What is the theoretical compression limit?
This question can be understood in two different ways:
(a) For a given compressor/decompressor, what is the best possible
lossless compression for an arbitrary string (byte sequence)
given as input?
(b) For a given string, what is the best possible lossless
compressor/decompressor?
For case (a), the question is generally meaningless, because a
specific compressor may compress one very large input file down to a
single bit, and enlarge all other files by only one bit. There is no
lossless compressor that is guaranteed to compress all possible input
files. If it compresses some files, then it must enlarge some others.
This can be proven by a simple counting argument (see item 9). In
case (a), the size of the decompressor is not taken into account for
the determination of the compression ratio since the decompressor is
fixed and it may decompress an arbitrary number of files of arbitrary
length.
For case (b), it is of course necessary to take into account the size
of the decompressor. The problem may be restated as "What is the
shortest program p which, when executed, produces the input string s?".
The size of this program is known as the Kolmogorov complexity
of the string s. Strings that are truly random are not compressible:
the smallest representation of the string is the string itself.
On the other hand, the output of a pseudo-random number generator
can be extremely compressible, since it is sufficient to know the
parameters and seed of the generator to reproduce an arbitrary
long sequence.
References: "An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and its Applications",
Ming Li and Paul Vitanyi, Springer-Verlag, 1992
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [74] Introduction to JBIG
JBIG software and the JBIG specification are available on nic.funet.fi
in /pub/graphics/misc/test-images/jbig.tar.gz.
A short introduction to JBIG, written by Mark Adler <madler@cco.caltech.edu>:
JBIG losslessly compresses binary (one-bit/pixel) images. (The B stands
for bi-level.) Basically it models the redundancy in the image as the
correlations of the pixel currently being coded with a set of nearby
pixels called the template. An example template might be the two
pixels preceding this one on the same line, and the five pixels centered
above this pixel on the previous line. Note that this choice only
involves pixels that have already been seen from a scanner.
The current pixel is then arithmetically coded based on the eight-bit
(including the pixel being coded) state so formed. So there are (in this
case) 256 contexts to be coded. The arithmetic coder and probability
estimator for the contexts are actually IBM's (patented) Q-coder. The
Q-coder uses low precision, rapidly adaptable (those two are related)
probability estimation combined with a multiply-less arithmetic coder.
The probability estimation is intimately tied to the interval calculations
necessary for the arithmetic coding.
JBIG actually goes beyond this and has adaptive templates, and probably
some other bells and whistles I don't know about. You can find a
description of the Q-coder as well as the ancestor of JBIG in the Nov 88
issue of the IBM Journal of Research and Development. This is a very
complete and well written set of five articles that describe the Q-coder
and a bi-level image coder that uses the Q-coder.
You can use JBIG on grey-scale or even color images by simply applying
the algorithm one bit-plane at a time. You would want to recode the
grey or color levels first though, so that adjacent levels differ in
only one bit (called Gray-coding). I hear that this works well up to
about six bits per pixel, beyond which JPEG's lossless mode works better.
You need to use the Q-coder with JPEG also to get this performance.
Actually no lossless mode works well beyond six bits per pixel, since
those low bits tend to be noise, which doesn't compress at all.
Anyway, the intent of JBIG is to replace the current, less effective
group 3 and 4 fax algorithms.
Another introduction to JBIG, written by Hank van Bekkem <jbek@oce.nl>:
The following description of the JBIG algorithm is derived from
experiences with a software implementation I wrote following the
specifications in the revision 4.1 draft of September 16, 1991. The
source will not be made available in the public domain, as parts of
JBIG are patented.
JBIG (Joint Bi-level Image Experts Group) is an experts group of ISO,
IEC and CCITT (JTC1/SC2/WG9 and SGVIII). Its job is to define a
compression standard for lossless image coding ([1]). The main
characteristics of the proposed algorithm are:
- Compatible progressive/sequential coding. This means that a
progressively coded image can be decoded sequentially, and the
other way around.
- JBIG will be a lossless image compression standard: all bits in
your images before and after compression and decompression will be
exactly the same.
In the rest of this text I will first describe the JBIG algorithm in
a short abstract of the draft. I will conclude by saying something
about the value of JBIG.
JBIG algorithm.
--------------
JBIG parameter P specifies the number of bits per pixel in the image.
Its allowable range is 1 through 255, but starting at P=8 or so,
compression will be more efficient using other algorithms. On the
other hand, medical images such as chest X-rays are often stored with
12 bits per pixel, while no distorsion is allowed, so JBIG can
certainly be of use in this area. To limit the number of bit changes
between adjacent decimal values (e.g. 127 and 128), it is wise to use
Gray coding before compressing multi-level images with JBIG. JBIG
then compresses the image on a bitplane basis, so the rest of this
text assumes bi-level pixels.
Progressive coding is a way to send an image gradually to a receiver
instead of all at once. During sending, more detail is sent, and the
receiver can build the image from low to high detail. JBIG uses
discrete steps of detail by successively doubling the resolution. The
sender computes a number of resolution layers D, and transmits these
starting at the lowest resolution Dl. Resolution reduction uses
pixels in the high resolution layer and some already computed low
resolution pixels as an index into a lookup table. The contents of
this table can be specified by the user.
Compatibility between progressive and sequential coding is achieved
by dividing an image into stripes. Each stripe is a horizontal bar
with a user definable height. Each stripe is separately coded and
transmitted, and the user can define in which order stripes,
resolutions and bitplanes (if P>1) are intermixed in the coded data.
A progressive coded image can be decoded sequentially by decoding
each stripe, beginning by the one at the top of the image, to its
full resolution, and then proceeding to the next stripe. Progressive
decoding can be done by decoding only a specific resolution layer
from all stripes.
After dividing an image into bitplanes, resolution layers and
stripes, eventually a number of small bi-level bitmaps are left to
compress. Compression is done using a Q-coder. Reference [2]
contains a full description, I will only outline the basic principles
here.
The Q-coder codes bi-level pixels as symbols using the probability of
occurrence of these symbols in a certain context. JBIG defines two
kinds of context, one for the lowest resolution layer (the base
layer), and one for all other layers (differential layers).
Differential layer contexts contain pixels in the layer to be coded,
and in the corresponding lower resolution layer.
For each combination of pixel values in a context, the probability
distribution of black and white pixels can be different. In an all
white context, the probability of coding a white pixel will be much
greater than that of coding a black pixel. The Q-coder assigns, just
like a Huffman coder, more bits to less probable symbols, and so
achieves compression. The Q-coder can, unlike a Huffmann coder,
assign one output codebit to more than one input symbol, and thus is
able to compress bi-level pixels without explicit clustering, as
would be necessary using a Huffman coder.
Maximum compression will be achieved when all probabilities (one set
for each combination of pixel values in the context) follow the
probabilities of the pixels. The Q-coder therefore continuously
adapts these probabilities to the symbols it sees.
JBIG value.
----------
In my opinion, JBIG can be regarded as two combined devices:
- Providing the user the service of sending or storing multiple
representations of images at different resolutions without any
extra cost in storage. Differential layer contexts contain pixels
in two resolution layers, and so enable the Q-coder to effectively
code the difference in information between the two layers, instead
of the information contained in every layer. This means that,
within a margin of approximately 5%, the number of resolution
layers doesn't effect the compression ratio.
- Providing the user a very efficient compression algorithm, mainly
for use with bi-level images. Compared to CCITT Group 4, JBIG is
approximately 10% to 50% better on text and line art, and even
better on halftones. JBIG is however, just like Group 4, somewhat
sensitive to noise in images. This means that the compression ratio
decreases when the amount of noise in your images increases.
An example of an application would be browsing through an image
database, e.g. an EDMS (engineering document management system).
Large A0 size drawings at 300 dpi or so would be stored using five
resolution layers. The lowest resolution layer would fit on a
computer screen. Base layer compressed data would be stored at the
beginning of the compressed file, thus making browsing through large
numbers of compressed drawings possible by reading and decompressing
just the first small part of all files. When the user stops browsing,
the system could automatically start decompressing all remaining
detail for printing at high resolution.
[1] "Progressive Bi-level Image Compression, Revision 4.1", ISO/IEC
JTC1/SC2/WG9, CD 11544, September 16, 1991
[2] "An overview of the basic principles of the Q-coder adaptive
binary arithmetic coder", W.B. Pennebaker, J.L. Mitchell, G.G.
Langdon, R.B. Arps, IBM Journal of research and development,
Vol.32, No.6, November 1988, pp. 771-726 (See also the other
articles about the Q-coder in this issue)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [75] Introduction to JPEG
Here is a brief overview of the inner workings of JPEG, plus some references
for more detailed information, written by Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>.
Please read item 19 in part 1 first.
JPEG works on either full-color or gray-scale images; it does not handle
bilevel (black and white) images, at least not well. It doesn't handle
colormapped images either; you have to pre-expand those into an unmapped
full-color representation. JPEG works best on "continuous tone" images.
Images with many sudden jumps in color values will not compress well.
There are a lot of parameters to the JPEG compression process. By adjusting
the parameters, you can trade off compressed image size against reconstructed
image quality over a *very* wide range. You can get image quality ranging
from op-art (at 100x smaller than the original 24-bit image) to quite
indistinguishable from the source (at about 3x smaller). Usually the
threshold of visible difference from the source image is somewhere around 10x
to 20x smaller than the original, ie, 1 to 2 bits per pixel for color images.
Grayscale images do not compress as much. In fact, for comparable visual
quality, a grayscale image needs perhaps 25% less space than a color image;
certainly not the 66% less that you might naively expect.
JPEG defines a "baseline" lossy algorithm, plus optional extensions for
progressive and hierarchical coding. There is also a separate lossless
compression mode; this typically gives about 2:1 compression, ie, about 12
bits per color pixel. Most currently available JPEG hardware and software
handles only the baseline mode.
Here's the outline of the baseline compression algorithm:
1. Transform the image into a suitable color space. This is a no-op for
grayscale, but for color images you generally want to transform RGB into a
luminance/chrominance color space (YCbCr, YUV, etc). The luminance component
is grayscale and the other two axes are color information. The reason for
doing this is that you can afford to lose a lot more information in the
chrominance components than you can in the luminance component: the human eye
is not as sensitive to high-frequency chroma info as it is to high-frequency
luminance. (See any TV system for precedents.) You don't have to change the
color space if you don't want to, since the remainder of the algorithm works
on each color component independently, and doesn't care just what the data
is. However, compression will be less since you will have to code all the
components at luminance quality. Note that colorspace transformation is
slightly lossy due to roundoff error, but the amount of error is much smaller
than what we typically introduce later on.
2. (Optional) Downsample each component by averaging together groups of
pixels. The luminance component is left at full resolution, while the chroma
components are often reduced 2:1 horizontally and either 2:1 or 1:1 (no
change) vertically. In JPEG-speak these alternatives are usually called 2h2v
and 2h1v sampling, but you may also see the terms "411" and "422" sampling.
This step immediately reduces the data volume by one-half or one-third.
In numerical terms it is highly lossy, but for most images it has almost no
impact on perceived quality, because of the eye's poorer resolution for chroma
info. Note that downsampling is not applicable to grayscale data; this is one
reason color images are more compressible than grayscale.
3. Group the pixel values for each component into 8x8 blocks. Transform each
8x8 block through a discrete cosine transform (DCT). The DCT is a relative of
the Fourier transform and likewise gives a frequency map, with 8x8 components.
Thus you now have numbers representing the average value in each block and
successively higher-frequency changes within the block. The motivation for
doing this is that you can now throw away high-frequency information without
affecting low-frequency information. (The DCT transform itself is reversible
except for roundoff error.) See question 25 for fast DCT algorithms.
4. In each block, divide each of the 64 frequency components by a separate
"quantization coefficient", and round the results to integers. This is the
fundamental information-losing step. The larger the quantization
coefficients, the more data is discarded. Note that even the minimum possible
quantization coefficient, 1, loses some info, because the exact DCT outputs
are typically not integers. Higher frequencies are always quantized less
accurately (given larger coefficients) than lower, since they are less visible
to the eye. Also, the luminance data is typically quantized more accurately
than the chroma data, by using separate 64-element quantization tables.
Tuning the quantization tables for best results is something of a black art,
and is an active research area. Most existing encoders use simple linear
scaling of the example tables given in the JPEG standard, using a single
user-specified "quality" setting to determine the scaling multiplier. This
works fairly well for midrange qualities (not too far from the sample tables
themselves) but is quite nonoptimal at very high or low quality settings.
5. Encode the reduced coefficients using either Huffman or arithmetic coding.
(Strictly speaking, baseline JPEG only allows Huffman coding; arithmetic
coding is an optional extension.) Notice that this step is lossless, so it
doesn't affect image quality. The arithmetic coding option uses Q-coding;
it is identical to the coder used in JBIG (see question 74). Be aware that
Q-coding is patented. Most existing implementations support only the Huffman
mode, so as to avoid license fees. The arithmetic mode offers maybe 5 or 10%
better compression, which isn't enough to justify paying fees.
6. Tack on appropriate headers, etc, and output the result. In a normal
"interchange" JPEG file, all of the compression parameters are included
in the headers so that the decompressor can reverse the process. These
parameters include the quantization tables and the Huffman coding tables.
For specialized applications, the spec permits those tables to be omitted
from the file; this saves several hundred bytes of overhead, but it means
that the decompressor must know a-priori what tables the compressor used.
Omitting the tables is safe only in closed systems.
The decompression algorithm reverses this process. The decompressor
multiplies the reduced coefficients by the quantization table entries to
produce approximate DCT coefficients. Since these are only approximate,
the reconstructed pixel values are also approximate, but if the design
has done what it's supposed to do, the errors won't be highly visible.
A high-quality decompressor will typically add some smoothing steps to
reduce pixel-to-pixel discontinuities.
The JPEG standard does not specify the exact behavior of compressors and
decompressors, so there's some room for creative implementation. In
particular, implementations can trade off speed against image quality by
choosing more accurate or faster-but-less-accurate approximations to the
DCT. Similar tradeoffs exist for the downsampling/upsampling and colorspace
conversion steps. (The spec does include some minimum accuracy requirements
for the DCT step, but these are widely ignored, and are not too meaningful
anyway in the absence of accuracy requirements for the other lossy steps.)
Extensions:
The progressive mode is intended to support real-time transmission of images.
It allows the DCT coefficients to be sent piecemeal in multiple "scans" of
the image. With each scan, the decoder can produce a higher-quality
rendition of the image. Thus a low-quality preview can be sent very quickly,
then refined as time allows. The total space needed is roughly the same as
for a baseline JPEG image of the same final quality. (In fact, it can be
somewhat *less* if a custom Huffman table is used for each scan, because the
Huffman codes can be optimized over a smaller, more uniform population of
data than appears in a baseline image's single scan.) The decoder must do
essentially a full JPEG decode cycle for each scan: inverse DCT, upsample,
and color conversion must all be done again, not to mention any color
quantization for 8-bit displays. So this scheme is useful only with fast
decoders or slow transmission lines. Up until 1995, progressive JPEG was a
rare bird, but its use is now spreading as software decoders have become fast
enough to make it useful with modem-speed data transmission.
The hierarchical mode represents an image at multiple resolutions. For
example, one could provide 512x512, 1024x1024, and 2048x2048 versions of the
image. The higher-resolution images are coded as differences from the next
smaller image, and thus require many fewer bits than they would if stored
independently. (However, the total number of bits will be greater than that
needed to store just the highest-resolution frame in baseline form.)
The individual frames in a hierarchical sequence can be coded progressively
if desired. Hierarchical mode is not widely supported at present.
Part 3 of the JPEG standard, approved at the end of 1995, introduces several
new extensions. The one most likely to become popular is variable
quantization, which allows the quantization table to be scaled to different
levels in different parts of the image. In this way the "more critical"
parts of the image can be coded at higher quality than the "less critical"
parts. A signaling code can be inserted at any DCT block boundary to set a
new scaling factor.
Another Part 3 extension is selective refinement. This feature permits a
scan in a progressive sequence, or a refinement frame of a hierarchical
sequence, to cover only part of the total image area. This is an
alternative way of solving the variable-quality problem. My (tgl's) guess
is that this will not get widely implemented, with variable quantization
proving a more popular approach, but I've been wrong before.
The third major extension added by Part 3 is a "tiling" concept that allows
an image to be built up as a composite of JPEG frames, which may have
different sizes, resolutions, quality settings, even colorspaces. (For
example, a color image that occupies a small part of a mostly-grayscale page
could be represented as a separate frame, without having to store the whole
page in color.) Again, there's some overlap in functionality with variable
quantization and selective refinement. The general case of arbitrary tiles
is rather complex and is unlikely to be widely implemented. In the simplest
case all the tiles are the same size and use similar quality settings.
This case may become popular even if the general tiling mechanism doesn't,
because it surmounts the 64K-pixel-on-a-side image size limitation that was
(not very foresightedly) built into the basic JPEG standard. The individual
frames are still restricted to 64K for compatibility reasons, but the total
size of a tiled JPEG image can be up to 2^32 pixels on a side.
Lossless JPEG:
The separate lossless mode does not use DCT, since roundoff errors prevent a
DCT calculation from being lossless. For the same reason, one would not
normally use colorspace conversion or downsampling, although these are
permitted by the standard. The lossless mode simply codes the difference
between each pixel and the "predicted" value for the pixel. The predicted
value is a simple function of the already-transmitted pixels just above and
to the left of the current one (for example, their average; 8 different
predictor functions are permitted). The sequence of differences is encoded
using the same back end (Huffman or arithmetic) used in the lossy mode.
Lossless JPEG with the Huffman back end is certainly not a state-of-the-art
lossless compression method, and wasn't even when it was introduced. The
arithmetic-coding back end may make it competitive, but you're probably best
off looking at other methods if you need only lossless compression.
The main reason for providing a lossless option is that it makes a good
adjunct to the hierarchical mode: the final scan in a hierarchical sequence
can be a lossless coding of the remaining differences, to achieve overall
losslessness. This isn't quite as useful as it may at first appear, because
exact losslessness is not guaranteed unless the encoder and decoder have
identical IDCT implementations (ie, identical roundoff errors). And you
can't use downsampling or colorspace conversion either if you want true
losslessness. But in some applications the combination is useful.
References:
For a good technical introduction to JPEG, see:
Wallace, Gregory K. "The JPEG Still Picture Compression Standard",
Communications of the ACM, April 1991 (vol. 34 no. 4), pp. 30-44.
(Adjacent articles in that issue discuss MPEG motion picture compression,
applications of JPEG, and related topics.) If you don't have the CACM issue
handy, a PostScript file containing a revised version of this article is
available at ftp://ftp.uu.net/graphics/jpeg/wallace.ps.gz. This file
(actually a preprint for a later article in IEEE Trans. Consum. Elect.)
omits the sample images that appeared in CACM, but it includes corrections
and some added material. Note: the Wallace article is copyright ACM and
IEEE, and it may not be used for commercial purposes.
An alternative, more leisurely explanation of JPEG can be found in "The Data
Compression Book" by Mark Nelson ([Nel 1991], see question 7). This book
provides excellent introductions to many data compression methods including
JPEG, plus sample source code in C. The JPEG-related source code is far from
industrial-strength, but it's a pretty good learning tool.
An excellent textbook about JPEG is "JPEG Still Image Data Compression
Standard" by William B. Pennebaker and Joan L. Mitchell. Published by Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1993, ISBN 0-442-01272-1. 650 pages, price US$59.95.
(VNR will accept credit card orders at 800/842-3636, or get your local
bookstore to order it.) This book includes the complete text of the ISO
JPEG standards, DIS 10918-1 and draft DIS 10918-2. Review by Tom Lane:
"This is by far the most complete exposition of JPEG in existence. It's
written by two people who know what they are talking about: both served on
the ISO JPEG standards committee. If you want to know how JPEG works or
why it works that way, this is the book to have."
There are a number of errors in the first printing of the Pennebaker and
Mitchell book. An errata list is available at
ftp://ftp.uu.net/graphics/jpeg/pm.errata.gz. At last report, all known
errors were fixed in the second printing.
The official specification of JPEG is not currently available on-line, and
is not likely ever to be available for free because of ISO and ITU copyright
restrictions. You can order it from your national standards agency as ISO
standards IS 10918-1, 10918-2, 10918-3, or as ITU-T standards T.81, T.83,
T.84. See ftp://ftp.uu.net/graphics/jpeg/jpeg.documents.gz for more info.
NOTE: buying the Pennebaker and Mitchell textbook is a much better deal
than purchasing the standard directly: it's cheaper and includes a lot of
useful explanatory material along with the full draft text of the spec.
The book unfortunately doesn't include Part 3 of the spec, but if you need
Part 3, buy the book and just that part and you'll still be ahead.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [76] What is Vector Quantization?
Some vector quantization software for data analysis that is available
in the ftp://cochlea.hut.fi/pub/ directory. One package is lvq_pak and
one is som_pak (som_pak generates Kohonen maps of data using lvq to
cluster it).
A VQ-based codec that is based on the Predictive Residual Vector
Quantization is in ftp://mozart.eng.buffalo.edu/pub/prvq_codec/PRVQ.tar.gz
VQ software is also available in ftp://isdl.ee.washington.edu/pub/VQ/
For a book on Vector Quantization, see the reference (Gersho and Gray)
given in item 7 of this FAQ. For a review article: N. M. Nasrabadi and
R. A. King, "Image Coding Using Vector Quantization: A review",
IEEE Trans. on Communications, vol. COM-36, pp. 957-971, Aug. 1988.
A short introduction to Vector Quantization, written by Alex Zatsman
<alex.zatsman@analog.com>:
In Scalar Quantization one represents the values by fixed subset of
representative values. For examples, if you have 16 bit values and
send only 8 most signifcant bits, you get an approximation of the
original data at the expense of precision. In this case the fixed
subset is all the 16-bit numbers divisable by 256, i.e 0, 256, 512,...
In Vector Quantization you represent not individual values but
(usually small) arrays of them. A typical example is a color map: a
color picture can be represented by a 2D array of triplets (RGB
values). In most pictures those triplets do not cover the whole RGB
space but tend to concetrate in certain areas. For example, the
picture of a forest will typically have a lot of green. One can select
a relatively small subset (typically 256 elements) of representative
colors, i.e RGB triplets, and then approximate each triplet by the
representative of that small set. In case of 256 one can use 1 byte
instead of 3 for each pixel.
One can do the same for any large data sets, especialy when
consecutive points are correlated in some way. CELP speech compression
algorithms use those subsets "codebooks" and use them to quantize
exciation vectors for linear prediction -- hence the name CELP which
stands for Codebook Excited Linear Prediction. (See item 26 in part 1
of this FAQ for more information about CELP.)
Note that Vector Quantization, just like Scalar Quantization, is a lossy
compression.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [77] Introduction to Fractal compression (long)
Written by John Kominek <kominek@links.uwaterloo.ca>
Seven things you should know about Fractal Image Compression (assuming that
you want to know about it).
1. It is a promising new technology, arguably superior to JPEG --
but only with an argument.
2. It is a lossy compression method.
3. The fractals in Fractal Image Compression are Iterated Function
Systems.
4. It is a form of Vector Quantization, one that employs a virtual
codebook.
5. Resolution enhancement is a powerful feature but is not some
magical way of achieving 1000:1 compression.
6. Compression is slow, decompression is fast.
7. The technology is patented.
That's the scoop in condensed form. Now to elaborate, beginning with a little
background.
A Brief History of Fractal Image Compression
--------------------------------------------
The birth of fractal geometry (or rebirth, rather) is usually traced to IBM
mathematician Benoit B. Mandelbrot and the 1977 publication of his seminal
book The Fractal Geometry of Nature. The book put forth a powerful thesis:
traditional geometry with its straight lines and smooth surfaces does not
resemble the geometry of trees and clouds and mountains. Fractal geometry,
with its convoluted coastlines and detail ad infinitum, does.
This insight opened vast possibilities. Computer scientists, for one, found a
mathematics capable of generating artificial and yet realistic looking land-
scapes, and the trees that sprout from the soil. And mathematicians had at
their disposal a new world of geometric entities.
It was not long before mathematicians asked if there was a unity among this
diversity. There is, as John Hutchinson demonstrated in 1981, it is the branch
of mathematics now known as Iterated Function Theory. Later in the decade
Michael Barnsley, a leading researcher from Georgia Tech, wrote the popular
book Fractals Everywhere. The book presents the mathematics of Iterated Func-
tions Systems (IFS), and proves a result known as the Collage Theorem. The
Collage Theorem states what an Iterated Function System must be like in order
to represent an image.
This presented an intriguing possibility. If, in the forward direction, frac-
tal mathematics is good for generating natural looking images, then, in the
reverse direction, could it not serve to compress images? Going from a given
image to an Iterated Function System that can generate the original (or at
least closely resemble it), is known as the inverse problem. This problem
remains unsolved.
Barnsley, however, armed with his Collage Theorem, thought he had it solved.
He applied for and was granted a software patent and left academia to found
Iterated Systems Incorporated (US patent 4,941,193. Alan Sloan is the co-
grantee of the patent and co-founder of Iterated Systems.) Barnsley announced
his success to the world in the January 1988 issue of BYTE magazine. This
article did not address the inverse problem but it did exhibit several images
purportedly compressed in excess of 10,000:1. Alas, it was not a breakthrough.
The images were given suggestive names such as "Black Forest" and "Monterey
Coast" and "Bolivian Girl" but they were all manually constructed. Barnsley's
patent has come to be derisively referred to as the "graduate student algo-
rithm."
Graduate Student Algorithm
o Acquire a graduate student.
o Give the student a picture.
o And a room with a graphics workstation.
o Lock the door.
o Wait until the student has reverse engineered the picture.
o Open the door.
Attempts to automate this process have met little success. As Barnsley admit-
ted in 1988: "Complex color images require about 100 hours each to encode and
30 minutes to decode on the Masscomp [dual processor workstation]." That's 100
hours with a _person_ guiding the process.
Ironically, it was one of Barnsley's PhD students that made the graduate
student algorithm obsolete. In March 1988, according to Barnsley, he arrived
at a modified scheme for representing images called Partitioned Iterated
Function Systems (PIFS). Barnsley applied for and was granted a second patent
on an algorithm that can automatically convert an image into a Partitioned
Iterated Function System, compressing the image in the process. (US patent
5,065,447. Granted on Nov. 12 1991.) For his PhD thesis, Arnaud Jacquin imple-
mented the algorithm in software, a description of which appears in his land-
mark paper "Image Coding Based on a Fractal Theory of Iterated Contractive
Image Transformations." The algorithm was not sophisticated, and not speedy,
but it was fully automatic. This came at price: gone was the promise of
10,000:1 compression. A 24-bit color image could typically be compressed from
8:1 to 50:1 while still looking "pretty good." Nonetheless, all contemporary
fractal image compression programs are based upon Jacquin's paper.
That is not to say there are many fractal compression programs available.
There are not. Iterated Systems sell the only commercial compressor/decompres-
sor, an MS-Windows program called "Images Incorporated." There are also an
increasing number of academic programs being made freely available. Unfor-
tunately, these programs are -- how should I put it? -- of merely academic
quality.
This scarcity has much to do with Iterated Systems' tight lipped policy about
their compression technology. They do, however, sell a Windows DLL for pro-
grammers. In conjunction with independent development by researchers else-
where, therefore, fractal compression will gradually become more pervasive.
Whether it becomes all-pervasive remains to be seen.
Historical Highlights:
1977 -- Benoit Mandelbrot finishes the first edition of The Fractal
Geometry of Nature.
1981 -- John Hutchinson publishes "Fractals and Self-Similarity."
1983 -- Revised edition of The Fractal Geometry of Nature is
published.
1985 -- Michael Barnsley and Stephen Demko introduce Iterated
Function Theory in "Iterated Function Systems and the Global
Construction of Fractals."
1987 -- Iterated Systems Incorporated is founded.
1988 -- Barnsley publishes the book Fractals Everywhere.
1990 -- Barnsley's first patent is granted.
1991 -- Barnsley's second patent is granted.
1992 -- Arnaud Jacquin publishes an article that describes the first
practical fractal image compression method.
1993 -- The book Fractal Image Compression by Michael Barnsley and Lyman
Hurd is published.
-- The Iterated Systems' product line matures.
1994 -- Put your name here.
On the Inside
-------------
The fractals that lurk within fractal image compression are not those of the
complex plane (Mandelbrot Set, Julia sets), but of Iterated Function Theory.
When lecturing to lay audiences, the mathematician Heinz-Otto Peitgen intro-
duces the notion of Iterated Function Systems with the alluring metaphor of a
Multiple Reduction Copying Machine. A MRCM is imagined to be a regular copying
machine except that:
1. There are multiple lens arrangements to create multiple overlapping
copies of the original.
2. Each lens arrangement reduces the size of the original.
3. The copier operates in a feedback loop, with the output of one
stage the input to the next. The initial input may be anything.
The first point is what makes an IFS a system. The third is what makes it
iterative. As for the second, it is implicitly understood that the functions
of an Iterated Function Systems are contractive.
An IFS, then, is a set of contractive transformations that map from a defined
rectangle of the real plane to smaller portions of that rectangle. Almost
invariably, affine transformations are used. Affine transformations act to
translate, scale, shear, and rotate points in the plane. Here is a simple
example:
|---------------| |-----|
|x | |1 |
| | | |
| | |---------------|
| | |2 |3 |
| | | | |
|---------------| |---------------|
Before After
Figure 1. IFS for generating Sierpinski's Triangle.
This IFS contains three component transformations (three separate lens ar-
rangements in the MRCM metaphor). Each one shrinks the original by a factor of
2, and then translates the result to a new location. It may optionally scale
and shift the luminance values of the rectangle, in a manner similar to the
contrast and brightness knobs on a TV.
The amazing property of an IFS is that when the set is evaluated by iteration,
(i.e. when the copy machine is run), a unique image emerges. This latent image
is called the fixed point or attractor of the IFS. As guaranteed by a result
known as the Contraction Theorem, it is completely independent of the initial
image. Two famous examples are Sierpinski's Triangle and Barnsley's Fern.
Because these IFSs are contractive, self-similar detail is created at every
resolution down to the infinitesimal. That is why the images are fractal.
The promise of using fractals for image encoding rests on two suppositions: 1.
many natural scenes possess this detail within detail structure (e.g. clouds),
and 2. an IFS can be found that generates a close approximation of a scene
using only a few transformations. Barnsley's fern, for example, needs but
four. Because only a few numbers are required to describe each transformation,
an image can be represented very compactly. Given an image to encode, finding
the optimal IFS from all those possible is known as the inverse problem.
The inverse problem -- as mentioned above -- remains unsolved. Even if it
were, it may be to no avail. Everyday scenes are very diverse in subject
matter; on whole, they do not obey fractal geometry. Real ferns do not branch
down to infinity. They are distorted, discolored, perforated and torn. And the
ground on which they grow looks very much different.
To capture the diversity of real images, then, Partitioned IFSs are employed.
In a PIFS, the transformations do not map from the whole image to the parts,
but from larger parts to smaller parts. An image may vary qualitatively from
one area to the next (e.g. clouds then sky then clouds again). A PIFS relates
those areas of the original image that are similar in appearance. Using Jac-
quin's notation, the big areas are called domain blocks and the small areas
are called range blocks. It is necessary that every pixel of the original
image belong to (at least) one range block. The pattern of range blocks is
called the partitioning of an image.
Because this system of mappings is still contractive, when iterated it will
quickly converge to its latent fixed point image. Constructing a PIFS amounts
to pairing each range block to the domain block that it most closely resembles
under some to-be-determined affine transformation. Done properly, the PIFS
encoding of an image will be much smaller than the original, while still
resembling it closely.
Therefore, a fractal compressed image is an encoding that describes:
1. The grid partitioning (the range blocks).
2. The affine transforms (one per range block).
The decompression process begins with a flat gray background. Then the set of
transformations is repeatedly applied. After about four iterations the attrac-
tor stabilizes. The result will not (usually) be an exact replica of the
original, but reasonably close.
Scalelessnes and Resolution Enhancement
---------------------------------------
When an image is captured by an acquisition device, such as a camera or scan-
ner, it acquires a scale determined by the sampling resolution of that device.
If software is used to zoom in on the image, beyond a certain point you don't
see additional detail, just bigger pixels.
A fractal image is different. Because the affine transformations are spatially
contractive, detail is created at finer and finer resolutions with each itera-
tion. In the limit, self-similar detail is created at all levels of resolu-
tion, down the infinitesimal. Because there is no level that 'bottoms out'
fractal images are considered to be scaleless.
What this means in practice is that as you zoom in on a fractal image, it will
still look 'as it should' without the staircase effect of pixel replication.
The significance of this is cause of some misconception, so here is the right
spot for a public service announcement.
/--- READER BEWARE ---\
Iterated Systems is fond of the following argument. Take a portrait that is,
let us say, a grayscale image 250x250 pixels in size, 1 byte per pixel. You
run it through their software and get a 2500 byte file (compression ratio =
25:1). Now zoom in on the person's hair at 4x magnification. What do you see?
A texture that still looks like hair. Well then, it's as if you had an image
1000x1000 pixels in size. So your _effective_ compression ratio is 25x16=400.
But there is a catch. Detail has not been retained, but generated. With a
little luck it will look as it should, but don't count on it. Zooming in on a
person's face will not reveal the pores.
Objectively, what fractal image compression offers is an advanced form of
interpolation. This is a useful and attractive property. Useful to graphic
artists, for example, or for printing on a high resolution device. But it does
not bestow fantastically high compression ratios.
\--- READER BEWARE ---/
That said, what is resolution enhancement? It is the process of compressing an
image, expanding it to a higher resolution, saving it, then discarding the
iterated function system. In other words, the compressed fractal image is the
means to an end, not the end itself.
The Speed Problem
-----------------
The essence of the compression process is the pairing of each range block to a
domain block such that the difference between the two, under an affine trans-
formation, is minimal. This involves a lot of searching.
In fact, there is nothing that says the blocks have to be squares or even
rectangles. That is just an imposition made to keep the problem tractable.
More generally, the method of finding a good PIFS for any given image involves
five main issues:
1. Partitioning the image into range blocks.
2. Forming the set of domain blocks.
3. Choosing type of transformations that will be considered.
4. Selecting a distance metric between blocks.
5. Specifying a method for pairing range blocks to domain blocks.
Many possibilities exist for each of these. The choices that Jacquin offered
in his paper are:
1. A two-level regular square grid with 8x8 pixels for the large
range blocks and 4x4 for the small ones.
2. Domain blocks are 16x16 and 8x8 pixels in size with a subsampling
step size of four. The 8 isometric symmetries (four rotations,
four mirror flips) expand the domain pool to a virtual domain
pool eight times larger.
3. The choices in the last point imply a shrinkage by two in each
direction, with a possible rotation or flip, and then a trans-
lation in the image plane.
4. Mean squared error is used.
5. The blocks are categorized as of type smooth, midrange, simple
edge, and complex edge. For a given range block the respective
category is searched for the best match.
The importance of categorization can be seen by calculating the size of the
total domain pool. Suppose the image is partitioned into 4x4 range blocks. A
256x256 image contains a total of (256-8+1)^2 = 62,001 different 8x8 domain
blocks. Including the 8 isometric symmetries increases this total to 496,008.
There are (256-4+1)^2 = 64,009 4x4 range blocks, which makes for a maximum of
31,748,976,072 possible pairings to test. Even on a fast workstation an ex-
haustive search is prohibitively slow. You can start the program before de-
parting work Friday afternoon; Monday morning, it will still be churning away.
Increasing the search speed is the main challenge facing fractal image com-
pression.
Similarity to Vector Quantization
---------------------------------
To the VQ community, a "vector" is a small rectangular block of pixels. The
premise of vector quantization is that some patterns occur much more frequent-
ly than others. So the clever idea is to store only a few of these common
patterns in a separate file called the codebook. Some codebook vectors are
flat, some are sloping, some contain tight texture, some sharp edges, and so
on -- there is a whole corpus on how to construct a codebook. Each codebook
entry (each domain block) is assigned an index number. A given image, then, is
partitioned into a regular grid array. Each grid element (each range block) is
represented by an index into the codebook. Decompressing a VQ file involves
assembling an image out of the codebook entries. Brick by brick, so to speak.
The similarity to fractal image compression is apparent, with some notable
differences.
1. In VQ the range blocks and domain blocks are the same size; in an
IFS the domain blocks are always larger.
2. In VQ the domain blocks are copied straight; in an IFS each domain
block undergoes a luminance scaling and offset.
3. In VQ the codebook is stored apart from the image being coded; in
an IFS the codebook is not explicitly stored. It is comprised of
portions of the attractor as it emerges during iteration. For that
reason it is called a "virtual codebook." It has no existence
independent of the affine transformations that define an IFS.
4. In VQ the codebook is shared among many images; in an IFS the
virtual codebook is specific to each image.
There is a more refined version of VQ called gain-shape vector quantization in
which a luminance scaling and offset is also allowed. This makes the similari-
ty to fractal image compression as close as can be.
Compression Ratios
------------------
Exaggerated claims not withstanding, compression ratios typically range from
4:1 to 100:1. All other things equal, color images can be compressed to a
greater extent than grayscale images.
The size of a fractal image file is largely determined by the number of trans-
formations of the PIFS. For the sake of simplicity, and for the sake of com-
parison to JPEG, assume that a 256x256x8 image is partitioned into a regular
partitioning of 8x8 blocks. There are 1024 range blocks and thus 1024 trans-
formations to store. How many bits are required for each?
In most implementations the domain blocks are twice the size of the range
blocks. So the spatial contraction is constant and can be hard coded into the
decompression program. What needs to be stored are:
x position of domain block 8 6
y position of domain block 8 6
luminance scaling 8 5
luminance offset 8 6
symmetry indicator 3 3
-- --
35 26 bits
In the first scheme, a byte is allocated to each number except for the symme-
try indicator. The upper bound on the compression ratio is thus (8x8x8)/35 =
14.63. In the second scheme, domain blocks are restricted to coordinates
modulo 4. Plus, experiments have revealed that 5 bits per scale factor and 6
bits per offset still give good visual results. So the compression ratio limit
is now 19.69. Respectable but not outstanding.
There are other, more complicated, schemes to reduce the bit rate further. The
most common is to use a three or four level quadtree structure for the range
partitioning. That way, smooth areas can be represented with large range
blocks (high compression), while smaller blocks are used as necessary to
capture the details. In addition, entropy coding can be applied as a back-end
step to gain an extra 20% or so.
Quality: Fractal vs. JPEG
-------------------------
The greatest irony of the coding community is that great pains are taken to
precisely measure and quantify the error present in a compressed image, and
great effort is expended toward minimizing an error measure that most often is
-- let us be gentle -- of dubious value. These measure include signal-to-noise
ratio, root mean square error, and mean absolute error. A simple example is
systematic shift: add a value of 10 to every pixel. Standard error measures
indicate a large distortion, but the image has merely been brightened.
With respect to those dubious error measures, and at the risk of over-sim-
plification, the results of tests reveal the following: for low compression
ratios JPEG is better, for high compression ratios fractal encoding is better.
The crossover point varies but is often around 40:1. This figure bodes well
for JPEG since beyond the crossover point images are so severely distorted
that they are seldom worth using.
Proponents of fractal compression counter that signal-to-noise is not a good
error measure and that the distortions present are much more 'natural looking'
than the blockiness of JPEG, at both low and high bit rates. This is a valid
point but is by no means universally accepted.
What the coding community desperately needs is an easy to compute error meas-
ure that accurately captures subjective impression of human viewers. Until
then, your eyes are the best judge.
Finding Out More
----------------
Please refer to item 17 in part 1 of this FAQ for a list of references,
available software, and ftp sites concerning fractal compression.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [78] The Burrows-Wheeler block sorting algorithm (long)
A high-quality implementation of the Burrows-Wheeler
block-sorting-based lossless compression algorithm is available at
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/arch/people/j-seward/bzip-0.21.tar.gz
Mark Nelson wrote an excellent article "Data Compression with the
Burrows-Wheeler Transform" for Dr. Dobb's Journal, September 1996. A copy
of the article is at http://web2.airmail.net/markn/articles/bwt/bwt.htm
Another introduction written by Sampo Syreeni <tmaaedu@nexus.edu.lahti.fi>:
The Burrows-Wheeler block sorting compression algorithm is described in
"A Block-sorting Lossless Data Compression Algorithm" by M. Burrows and D.J.
Wheeler, dated in May 10, 1994. A postscript copy of this paper has been made
available by Digital on the Systems Research Center (SRC) FTP site at
ftp://ftp.digital.com/pub/DEC/SRC/research-reports/SRC-124.ps.Z
The method was originally discovered by one of the authors (Wheeler) back
in 1983, but has not been published before. As such, the method is fairly new
and hasn't yet gained popularity.
The method described in the original paper is really a composite of three
different algorithms: the block sorting main engine (a lossless, very slightly
expansive preprocessor), the move-to-front coder (a byte-for-byte simple,
fast, locally adaptive noncompressive coder) and a simple statistical
compressor (first order Huffman is mentioned as a candidate) eventually doing
the compression. Of these three methods only the first two are discussed here
as they are what constitutes the heart of the algorithm. These two algorithms
combined form a completely reversible (lossless) transformation that - with
typical input - skews the first order symbol distributions to make the data
more compressible with simple methods. Intuitively speaking, the method
transforms slack in the higher order probabilities of the input block (thus
making them more even, whitening them) to slack in the lower order statistics.
This effect is what is seen in the histogram of the resulting symbol data.
The block sorting preprocessor operates purely on a block basis. One way
to understand the idea is to think of the input block arranged as a circular
array where, for every symbol, the succeeding symbols are used as a predictor.
This predictor is then used to group the symbols with similar right neighbors
together. This predictor is realized (conceptually) as a two phase process.
The first phase forms all cyclic shifts of the input block whose size is
usually a power of two. Note here that the original string is always present
intact on some row of the resulting matrix. If the block length is n then
there exist n unique rotations of the original string (to the left). These
rotations are now viewed as the rows of an N x N matrix of symbols. The second
phase consists of sorting this resulting conceptual matrix. This phase results
in the rows coming into order based on their first few symbols. If there is
some commonly repeated string in the input block (the original paper gives
"the" as an example), the sorting phase brings all those rotations that have a
part of this string as the row start very close to each other. The preceding
symbol in this common string is then found in the last column of the sorted
matrix. This way common strings result in short bursts of just a few distinct
characters being formed in the last column of the matrix. The last column is
what is then output from the second phase. One further bit of information is
derived from the input data. This is an integer with enough bits to tell the
size of the input string (that is, log_2(n)). The number is used to note the
row position into which the original input block got in the sorting algorithm.
This integer always results in expansion of the data, but is necessary for us
to be able successfully decompress the string. The absolute amount of overhead
increases as the logarithm of the input block size so its percentage of the
output data becomes negligible with useful block sizes anyway.
The characteristics of the transformation process make the output from the
sort ideal for certain kinds of further manipulation. The extreme local
fluctuations in the first order statistics of the output string lead one to
use a transformation that boosts and flattens the local fluttering of the
statistics. The best example (and, of course, the one given in the original
paper) is move-to-front coding. This coder codes a symbol as the number of
distinct symbols seen since the symbol's last occurrence. Basically this means
that the coder outputs the index of an input symbol in a dynamic LIFO stack
and then updates the stack by moving the symbol to the top. This is easy and
efficient to implement and results in fast local adaptation. As just a few
common symbols will (locally) govern the input to the coder, these symbols
will be kept on the top of the stack and thus the output will mainly consist
of low numbers. This makes it highly susceptible to first order statistical
compression methods which are, in case, easy and efficient to implement.
The transform matrix described above would require enormous amounts of
storage space and would not result in a usable algorithm as such. The method
can, however, be realized very efficiently by suffix and quick sort methods.
Thus the whole transformation together with the eventual simple compression
engine is extremely fast but still achieves impressive compression on typical
input data. When implemented well, the speeds achieved can be in the order of
pure LZ and the compression ratios can still approach state-of-the-art Markov
modeling coders. The engine also responds well to increasing block sizes -
the longer the input block, the more space there is for the patterns to form
and the more similar input strings there will be in it. This results in almost
monotonously increasing compression ratios even as the block length goes well
into the megabyte range.
The decompression cascade is basically just the compression cascade
backwards. More logic is needed to reverse the main sorting stage, however.
This logic involves reasoning around the order of the first the last column of
the conceptual coding matrix. The reader is referred to the original paper for
an in depth treatment of the subject. The original paper also contains a more
thorough discussion of why the method works and how to implement it.
And now a little demonstration. The original block to be compressed is
chosen to be the (rather pathological) string "good, jolly good". This was
taken as an example because it has high redundancy and it is exactly 16 bytes
long. The first picture shows the cyclic shifts (rotations) of the input
string. The second shows the matrix after sorting. Note that the last column
now has many double characters in it. Note also that the original string has
been placed into the 6th row now. The third picture shows the output for this
input block. The index integer has been packed to a full byte although 4 bits
would suffice in this case (log_2(16)=4). The fourth and fifth pictures show
the transformed string after move-to-front-coding. The sixth picture shows the
statistical distribution of the characters in the output string. Notice the
disproportionately large amount of ones and zeros, even with a very short
string like this. This is the output that is then routed through the simple
statistical encoder. It should compress very well, as the distribution of the
characters in the input block is now very uneven.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
------------------------------- -------------------------------
0 | g o o d , j o l l y g o o d 0 | g o o d g o o d , j o l l y
1 | o o d , j o l l y g o o d g 1 | j o l l y g o o d g o o d ,
2 | o d , j o l l y g o o d g o 2 | , j o l l y g o o d g o o d
3 | d , j o l l y g o o d g o o 3 | d , j o l l y g o o d g o o
4 | , j o l l y g o o d g o o d 4 | d g o o d , j o l l y g o o
5 | j o l l y g o o d g o o d , 5 | g o o d , j o l l y g o o d
6 | j o l l y g o o d g o o d , 6 | g o o d g o o d , j o l l y
7 | o l l y g o o d g o o d , j 7 | j o l l y g o o d g o o d ,
8 | l l y g o o d g o o d , j o 8 | l l y g o o d g o o d , j o
9 | l y g o o d g o o d , j o l 9 | l y g o o d g o o d , j o l
A | y g o o d g o o d , j o l l A | o d , j o l l y g o o d g o
B | g o o d g o o d , j o l l y B | o d g o o d , j o l l y g o
C | g o o d g o o d , j o l l y C | o l l y g o o d g o o d , j
D | o o d g o o d , j o l l y g D | o o d , j o l l y g o o d g
E | o d g o o d , j o l l y g o E | o o d g o o d , j o l l y g
F | d g o o d , j o l l y g o o F | y g o o d g o o d , j o l l
1. The shifts 2. In lexicographic order
121,45,102,114,0,1,36,0,
"y,dood oloojggl",5 1,113,1,0,112,110,0,3,5
3. The output from block sort 4. After move-to-front-coding
00: 4; 01: 3; 03: 1; 05: 1;
79,2D,66,72,0,1,24,0, 24: 1; 2D: 1; 66: 1; 6E: 1;
1,71,1,0,70,6E,0,3,5 70: 1; 71: 1; 72: 1; 79: 1
5. In hexadecimal 6. The statistics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of part 2 of the comp.compression faq.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Path: news1.ucsd.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!Germany.EU.net!main.Germany.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!jloup
From: gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu (Jean-loup Gailly)
Newsgroups: comp.compression,comp.compression.research,news.answers,comp.answers
Subject: comp.compression Frequently Asked Questions (part 3/3)
Supersedes: <compr3_20aug96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Followup-To: comp.compression
Date: 20 Sep 1996 13:11:48 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 613
Approved: news-answers-request@mit.edu
Distribution: world
Expires: 15 Nov 1996 16:17:20 GMT
Message-ID: <compr3_20sep96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
References: <compr1_20sep96@prep.ai.mit.edu> <compr2_20sep96@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Reply-To: gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Summary: *** READ THIS BEFORE POSTING ***
Keywords: data compression, FAQ
Originator: jloup@spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Xref: news1.ucsd.edu comp.compression:23973 comp.compression.research:2005 news.answers:65425 comp.answers:16347
Archive-name: compression-faq/part3
Last-modified: Feb 7th, 1996
This file is part 3 of a set of Frequently Asked Questions for the
groups comp.compression and comp.compression.research.
If you did not get part 1 or 2, you can get them at
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/compression-faq/top.html
or ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/
If you don't want to see this FAQ regularly, please add the subject
line to your kill file. If you have corrections or suggestions for
this FAQ, send them to Jean-loup Gailly <gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu>. Thank you.
Contents
========
Part 3: (Long) list of image compression hardware
[85] Image compression hardware
[99] Acknowledgments
Search for "Subject: [#]" to get to question number # quickly. Some news
readers can also take advantage of the message digest format used here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [85] Image compression hardware
Here is a list of sources of image compression hardware (JPEG, MPEG,
H.261 and others), reposted with the author's permission. The list is
certainly dated already, but it is a good starting point for
seeking compression chips. (Please send corrections/additions to
gzip@prep.ai.mit.edu). References are taken from:
VIDEO COMPRESSION OPTIONS, IEEE CICC 6-May-92
John J. Bloomer, jbloomer@crd.ge.com, Fathy F. Yassa, Aiman A. Abdel-Malek
General Electric Corporate R&D, KWC317 Signals and Systems Laboratory
PO Box 8, Schenectady NY, 12301
(Too many people have sent comments, corrections or additions so I am
just making a common acknowledgment here.)
[Check also:
http://www.dspnet.com/ Tech-Online's catalog
http://www.c-cube.com/ C-Cube Microsystems
http://datacompression.com/ DCP Research Corp
http://www.ftelinc.com/ FutureTel
]
Pipelined Processors, Building Blocks (Chip Sets)
-------------------------------------------------
STI3200, IMSA121, STI3208 - SGS-Thompson DCT processors. 602-867-6200
- 3200 has multiple block size options, DC to 13.5 MHz
- A121 8x8 fixed blocks, DC to 20MHz, add/sub loop, CCITT compatible
- 3208 8x8 fixed blocks, DC to 40MHz, CCITT compatible at 20MHz
STI3220 - SGS-Thompson motion estimator (H.261, MPEG). 602-867-6279
- 8-bit input pixels, 4-bit H and V vectors out
- adjustable block size matcher (8x8, 8x16, 16x16)
- +7/-8 search window
- 5V, 2W at 18MHz (max), 68 pin PLCC
L64765 , L64735 , L64745 - 3-chip LSI Logic JPEG set.
408-433-8000, 800-433-8778
- L64765 raster-to-block and color-space converter, jointly developed
with Rapid Tech.
- L64735 block DCT processor
- L64745 JPEG coder support, stand-alone lossless DPCM codec, dynamic
Huffman
- 27 MB/s on CCIR601 frames
- minimal support logic, color and gray scale
- 68-pin PGA or PLCC, 27 and 20 MHz versions
L647*0 and L6471* families - LSI Logic H.621/MPEG pieces. 408-433-8000
- L64720 motion estimator, 30/40MHz, 8x8, 16x16 blocks, 32x32 or 16x16
search window, 68-pin CPGA or PPGA
- L64730 & 735 8x8 DCT processors (12 & 8-9 bits)
- L64740 8x8 block quantization
- L64760 intra/inter-frame coding decision
- L64715 BCH error correction
- L64750/L64751 variable length encode/decode (H.261-specific)
ZR36020 and ZR36031 - Zoran DCT processor & quantization/encoding. 408-986-1314
- JPEG-like scheme using 16-bit, two's complement fixed point
arithmetic
- includes bit-rate controls for constant # of pictures per card
- 7.4 MHz, < 1W, 20mW in standby mode, 7.5 frames/s (f/s)
- 36020 - 44-pin plastic quad flatpack (PQFP) or 48-pin ceramic DIP
- 36031 - 100-pin PQFP or 85-pin PGA.
- co-developments with Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd. digital IC-card
camera market
Does 2-passes of image: generate histogram for optimum Huffman
tables and quantization compute step size (ala H.261 and
MPEG-I) for each macroblock or minimum coded unit (MCU).
JPEG-compatible codec expected soon.
LDM3104 - Olympus DCT coefficient encoder
- constant rate, digital IC-card camera market
- 750 mW, 25 mW standby, 100-poin QFP
TMC2312 - TRW quantizer/Huffman encoder, TMC2313 Huffman decoder/dequantizer
TMC2311 - TRW CMOS Fast Cosine Transform Processor.
- 12 Bits, 15 M pixels/s
- complies with the CCITT SGXV ( e.g. JPEG, H.261 and MPEG )
- includes an adder-subtractor for linear predictive coding
MN195901 - Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. See ISSCC 1992
- 16-bit, 60 MIP video signal processor
- 25 uS instruction processing
- on-board DCT and absolute differencing
- Philips Signetics US fab.
HGCT - Ricoh CRC, Generalized Chen Transform demonstration chip.
- 2D JPEG/MPEG/H.261 compatible DCT
- includes quantization
- 30MHz, 15K gates
- licensing possible
GCTX64000 - Graphic Communication Technology Corp. chipset
- provides CCITT H.261
- VLSI Technology and Hitachi supply H.261 codec core. 1 micron CMOS.
BT - British Telecommunications plc., Martlesham labs designed
- H.261 codec chipset, Motorola fab.
- 13 chips total for codec.
Pipelined Processors, Monolithic, Programmable
----------------------------------------------
Vision Processor - Integrated Information Technology Inc. 408-727-1885
- generic DCT, motion compensated & entropy coding codec
- microcode for still- and motion-video compression (JPEG, H.261 and
MPEG1)
- 1 micron CMOS, 20 MHz and 33 MHz, PGA and 84-pin QFP
- JPEG only and JPEG/H/261/MPEG versions available, H.261 at 30 f/s.
- used by Compression Labs, Inc. CDV teleconferencing system
- rumored to be the heart of the AT&T picture phone
MN195901 - Matsushita Electric Industrial Corp
- 40 MHz DSP, built-in DCT
- 16-bit fixed-point
AVP1000 - AT&T JPEG, MPEG and H.261 codec chipset. 800-372-2447
- 1400D decoder, 1400C system controller
- 1300E H.261 (CIF, QCIF, CIF240) at 30 f/s, I-frame only MPEG.
- 1400E is superset of 1300E, motion with 1/2 pixel resolution over +/-
32 pixels
- YCbCr video or digital input, on-board rate FIFOs, external RAM
required
- 0.75 micron, 50 MHz CMOS
AVP1000 is from AT&T Microelectronics. The AT&T chip set
handles MPEG-1, H.261, and JPEG. 1400D has on board color
space convertor. Limited to 4Mb/s coded rate. The DSP does
the MUSICAM decoding (up to layer II ?)
82750PB, 82750DB - Intel DVI pixel and display YUV color space processors.
- proprietary machine code employed for compression
- usable for other algorithms (e.g., JPEG, H.261 or MPEG1 at reduced
data rates)
Pipelined Processors, Monolithic, Fixed Lossless - Entropy Coders, DPCM, VQ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCP - Integrated Information Tech. Inc. Data Compressor Processor 408-727-1885
- LZ codec with on-chip dictionary store
- on-chip buffers supporting block moves
- targeting disk drives and network controller markets
- 3.3V, 84-pin PQFP
Mystic - HP's DC-LZ codec. 408-749-9500
AHA3210 - Advanced Hardware Architectures DC-LZ codec. 208-883-8000
- two independent DMA ports for 10 MB/s compress, decompress &
pass-thru
- addressing allows up to 16 MB record compression
- 20 MHz internal clock, 200 mW, 100-pin PQFP
- interface to AHA5101/5121 QIC tape controller/formatter
- HP licensee
AHA3xxx/xxy - Rice (UNC) algorithm, 20M samples/sec, 4 to 14 bits. 208-883-8000
CRM1000 - CERAM Inc. entropy codec, proprietary algorithm. 719-540-8500
Rice - UNC algorithm prototype, 180 Mb/s. See IEEE CICC 1992
- other CICC 1992 papers:
+JS.E. Kerneny et.al. differential read, pyramidal output CCD
+ A. Aggoun et.al. DPCM processing
DCD - Philips Data Compressor Decompressor IC. 914-945-6000
- See CICC 1990 proceedings, H. Blume, et.al.
- LZ codec, 20 MHz clock
- Internal FIFOs, separate input/output buses, max 10 Mword/s data in
- 5 V CMOS, 175-pin PGA
9705 - Second generation Stac Electronics accelerator chip. 619-431-7474
- Stacker LZA compression scheme(LZ-based)
- compress at approx. 2.5 MB/s, decompress at 6 MB/s (39+ faster than
9704)
- standby mode 300uA
- embedded in tapes and disks (e.g., QIC-122 Ten X Technology
512-346-8360)
- file compression board & software:
+ for the PC/AT - from Stac
+ for the Macintosh - from Sigma Design 415-770-0100 (40 MHz 9703)
- InfoChip Systems Inc. - proprietary string-matching technology
408-727-0514
VCEP or OTI95C71/Am95C71 - Oak Technology Inc. 408-737-0888
- AMD CCITT B&W fax image compression
Pipelined Processors, Monolithic, Fixed Lossy
---------------------------------------------
MB86356B - Fujitsu LTD.
- JPEG DIS 10918-1 baseline codec
- on-chip quantizer tables
- 2.5M pixel/sec input, up to 10MB/sec output
- supports progressive and DPCM lossless modes
- 135 pin PGA.
CL550-30 - C-Cube Microsystems 408-944-6300, literature@c-cube.com
- JPEG-8-R2 compliant baseline codec
- 350-level pipeline, on-chip Huffman and quantizer table
- 44.1 MB/sec (15 MB/sec for -10)
- RGB, YUV, CMYK supported, CCIR 601 in real-time
- 16/32-bit host interface
- 144 pin PGA or QFP, 2.5W at 29.41 MHz
Limited to 2MB/sec (15Mb/s) coded rate. 35MHz PGA version
available. 2:1 horizontal filter, on board programmable color
space convertor. Allows on pair of quantization tables to be
loaded while other pair is used to code or decode data stream.
Needs maintanence by host.
STI140 - SGS-Thompson JPEG baseline codec. 617-259-0300 [** Now cancelled **]
- see CICC 1991 proceedings, M. Bolton.
- 20 Mpixel/sec input, up to 20 MB/sec output
- supports 24-bit color, 8-bit grey and 12-bit extended pixels
- on chip Huffman and quantizer tables
- 144 pin PQFP, 5V, < 2W., 10mW power-down mode
- 1.2 micron, 3-layer metal CMOS, 20 MHz. `
UVC7710 - UVC Corp. Integrated Multimedia Processor. Was 714-261-5336, out
of business now.
- proprietary, patented intra-frame compression, on-chip code tables
- 20-35:1, 12.5 Mpixels/sec., compressed audio
- includes much of the PC-AT (16-bit ISA) bus interface logic
- 128 pin PJQFP plastic
CL950 - C-Cube/JVC implementation of the MPEG-JVC or extended mode MPEG2
announced. 6-9 Mb/sec.
JVC mode is not MPEG-II compliant (there isn't an MPEG2 standard yet)
but is an extension of MPEG1 at a higher rate plus interlace video
handling.
CL450 - Announced June 1992. Scaled down version of CL950, with 3Mb/sec
limit. Does not code or decode JPEG, only MPEG-I decoding.
CD-I - ASICs planned for CD-ROM, Compact Disk-Interactive defacto standards
- CD-ROM XA - Sony-Philips-Motorola-Microsoft
- CDTV - Commodore. YUV processing.
- audio ADPCM encode/decode PC/AT boards available from Sony
408-432-0190
Motorola MCD250 Full Motion Video Decoder. 512-928-5053.
This is a CD-I MPEG Video decoder which requires only a single
4Mbit DRAM for FMV decoding. Decodes System and Video Layers
at up to 5Mbits/sec, converts from 24/25/30 fps IPB streams to
25/30 fps output video in 24bit RGB/YUV format. Supports extra
CD-I functions such as windowing and still picture mode.
Targetted at low cost consumer applications such as CD-I,
CD-Karaoke, Video-CD and cable TV.
Motorola MCD260 MPEG Audio Host Interface and DSP56001-33. 512-928-5053.
The MCD260 is a low cost interface IC which goes between a 68K
bus and a DSP56K and strips out the MPEG System Layer whilst also
buffering and synchronising. A 33MHz 56001 with 8Kwords of DSPRAM
decodes the MPEG Audio (Layer 1/II @ 44.1KHz, all modes and bit rates)
Pixel Magic PM-2. Contact: Don Shulsinger, Pixel Magic, 508-688-4410.
- JBIG compression/decompression at 30 Mb/s (typical and worst-case)
- G3/G4 compression/decompression at 90 Mb/s (typical), 30 Mb/s (worst-case)
- scaling on decode from 1/256 to 256X
- rotation by 90 degrees
- clipping to a window and padding out to another
- lookup table filtering on 3x3 neighborhoods
- on-chip FIFOs on input and output
- bookmarking for suspend/resume
Codecs Chips Under Development
------------------------------
MPEG1 codec chips due from - TI, Brooktree, Cypress Semiconductor, Motorola
(successor to the DSP96002 Multimedia Engine), Xing Technology/Analog Devices,
Sony and C-Cube
Windbond Electronics Corp. is developing a DSP chip for CD-I, MPEG and JPEG
Using these Chips: Board Level Compression Hardware
------------------------------------------------------
+ JPEG Using CL550
+ JPEG Using Other Chip Sets
+ DSP Chip Based JPEG/MPEG Solutions
+ Integrated Compressed Digital Video Boards
JPEG Using CL550
---------------
C-Cube - 408-944-6300 ISA and NuBus boards
- for development and limited time-constraint applications
- 1-2.5 MB/sec host bus constraints
- Image Compression Interface (ISI) software for 3rd party CL550
integration
VideoSpigot/SuperSqueeze - SuperMac Technology 408 541-6100
- a CL550A on a NuBus board
- 24 frame/s with CD-quality audio
- reads from Winchester and magneto-optic drives
Fluency VSA-1000 - Fluent Machines, Inc. AT board set. 508 626-2144
- compress/decompress real-time synced audio & video to a i386 PC
Winchester
- NTSC or PAL input, 320x240 pixels saved
- uses i960 chip, no additional boards needed
- M/S Windows support, 3rd party S/W (e.g., AimTech 603-883-0220)
Super Motion Compression - New Media Graphics PC/AT board. 800 288-2207
- 8Khz, 8-bit compressed audio
- 30 f/s JPEG to & from disk
- earlier reports: still-frame compression in several seconds per MB
Leadview - Lead Tech Inc. AT board uses the CL550 to compress/decompress
JFIF or JTIF format files
Monalisa - Opta Inc. AT board uses the CL550
Squeeze - Rapid Technology AT board
- Integrated by a number of vendors into 3rd party multimedia,
video-editing PC stations
Parallax Graphics - SBus, VME and PC-AT boards. 408-727-2220 or
info@parallax.com
Chips and Technologies - JPEG development kit due.
Image Manipulation Systems, Inc - SBus compression/framebuffer/video I/O boards
800-745-5602 or imsinfo%thumper@src.honeywell.com
JPEG Using Other Chipsets
-------------------------
Visionary - Rapid Technology JPEG AT board. 716-833-8534
- LSI Logic JPEG chips L647-35, -45 & -65
- 30 f/s motion JPEG
- 256x240 pixel compression and display from CCIR-601 input
- private codec-frame buffer bus
- also integrated with TrueVision multimedia hardware
Media 100 - Data Translation nonlinear video production system for the
Macintosh (QuickTime). 22 MB/s (PAL) and 18MB/s (NTSC) throughput.
Alice - Telephoto Communications Inc. 619-452-0903
- Alice-H350 (PC/AT) and -H365 (PS/2) codec boards
- use a 40 MHz TMS320C51 DSP and a IMSA121 DCT processor chip
- JPEG (lossy and lossless), CCITT G3/G4, color and grey-scale images
Xing Technology - Hardware accelerator. xing@xingtech.com or 805-473-0145
- compatible with their VT-Express JPEG Turbo Accelerator Software
Video/1 - PsiTech Inc. 714-968-7818
- includes a 6U VME/VSB JPEG Processing Card
- compresses RS-170, NTSC, PAL or Secam video into 8 MB of on-board RAM
DSP Chip Based JPEG/MPEG Solutions
----------------------------------
Optipac - Optivision Inc. PC/AT, ISA & VME codecs. 800-562-8934
- JPEG (lossless and lossy), CCITT III/IV
- 1 to 5 TMS32C025s
- 512x400x16-bit images in < 1 sec.
XCeed ICDP-II - Micron Technology Inc. NuBus card
- uses two AT&T Microelectronics DSP-16 DSP chips
- driven by Storm Technologies PicturePress software
- executes an enhanced JPEG algorithm at near-realtime.
PicturePress Accelerator - Storm Technology 415-691-1111 (see above)
- also has a line of VME compression boards
- Micro Dynamics Ltd. imaging systems use Storm accelerator
301-589-6300
Picture Packer Accelerator - Video & Image Compression Corp.
- AT and NuBus boards use the JPEG Open Standard and a TMS320C25
SunVideo (S-bus) - Sun Microsystems
- PAL/NTSC framegrabber with an integrated C-Cube CL4000
VideoRISC processor and downloadable video compression for
MPEG, MJPEG or CellB. It achieves about 10 Frames/sec on
MPEG Level 1 picture data compression. The board costs about $1K.
Phoenix System - T/one Inc. uses an Optivision Optipac 3250 to talk to a Storm
Technologies NuBus PicturePress Accelerator to talk JPEG over
analog phone lines.
Nextdimension - NeXt Computer Inc. 415-780-3912
- 24+8-bit alpha, 640x480, 30 f/s decompression
- CL550 version not shipping as announced.
Spirit-40 - Sonitech International Inc. ISA card. 617-235-6824
- two TMS320C40 DSPs for 80 MFLOPS
- connect 16 boards in a hypercube for up to 1280 MFLOPS
- JPEG, MPEG-1 audio and other voice coding applications included
HardPak - CERAM Inc., ISA and EISA file compression board. 719-540-8500
- 3.4 x 1.8 inch footprint (notebook, laptops)
- 32KB on-board write-thru file compression cache
- CERAM also has an SBus compressive swap-space accelerator for Suns
macDSP - Spectral Innovations, AT&T DSPC32-based accelerator. 408-727-1314
- JPEG functions available
- 30 MFLOPS on the NuBus
Integrated Digital Video Boards - Miscellaneous Multimedia, Video Conferencing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCI/oem - Vista Communication Instruments, Inc. +358 0 460 099
- two AT-board H.261 video codec, PAL or NTSC cameras and monitors
-56 kbps (64 kbps) to 2 Mbps, 64 kbps increments
- H.221 framing and synchronizing - H.241 network signalling
- H.200/AV.254 forthcoming standard for compressed audio
- network interface boards available
MediaStation- VideoLogic Inc., JPEG compression board for ISA bus. 617-494-0530
- works with VideoLogic DVA-4000/ISA motion video board, custom bus
- CL-550 plus ADPCM and PCM audio support
- Inmos Transputer for I/O scheduling
- Microsoft Windows Multimedia Extensions and proprietary interfaces
DECspin - Digital Equipment CorpSound/Picture Information Network 508-493-5111
- full motion, true-color (24-bit) and greyscale (8-bit black & white)
- variable frame size and rate up to 640 x480 x30 NTSC true-color
- Internet or DECnet transmission and disk I/O of live synchronized
video/audio
- video teleconferencing using standard network protocols
- create and edit of audio and video sequences
- voice grade live audio sequences
- DECmedia DECvideo and DECaudio hardware and software required
ActionMedia II - Intel/IBM DVI PS/2 and PC/AT boards. 914-642-5472
- i750 processor boards for capture and delivery systems
- Microsoft programming support libraries
- proprietary RTV and PLV compression algorithms resident, time and
time/space VQ
- Real Time Video (RTV) algorithm 1.5 , effective 128x120 pixel
sequence at 30 f/s.
- RTV 1.0 is 128x240 at 10 f/s.
- Presentation Level Video (PLV) - extensive off-line processing,
exploits inter-frame coherence.
- i750 processor capable of playing-back PLV-compressed 256x240
sequences at 30 f/s.
DVI Board - Fast Electronic U.S. Inc. laptop board. 508-655-3278
- uses Intel i750 chipset
- compress or decompress video at up to 30 f/s
EyeQ - New Video Corp. DVI boards for the Macintosh. 213-396-0282
- uses Intel i750 chipset
- 150 KB/s full-motion compressed video
- T1 and Winchester integration paths
Copernicus 1000 & 2000 - DesignTech, 408-453-9510
- DVI-based presentation and authoring systems
Spectrum Signal Processing - DSP96002-based PC-AT board
- up to four boards in cascade
- other TI, Analog Devices and AT&T-based DSP offerings
Ariel Corp. - Dual DSP96002 PC-AT board with compression support. 201-429-2900
Capture I - UVC Corp., 16-bit ISA bus board. was 714-261-5336, out
of business now.
- 30 f/s of 640/480 interlace capture and record (uses UVC7710)
- NTSC or PAL input
- VPC200/201 development board set - proprietary NTSC video codec
(audio card required).
Leadview - Lead Technologies, Inc. accelerates an enhanced JPEG algorithm
on ISA
IBM - near-term availability:
(1) IBM United Kingdom and British Telecommunications plc.
- PC or PS/2 add-on boards by end of 1993
- interface to ISDN 2 service (one or two 64kb/s channels)
- BT also planning residential videophone product with GEC Marconi Ltd.
(2) IBM Japan PS/2 board
- uses GCTX64000 for H.261
- ISDN (narrowband 64kb/s ) and IEEE 802.5 LAN interfaces
Optibase 100 - Optibase, Inc. DSP-based compression/expansion boards.
818-719-6566
- supports JPEG
- supports CCITT G.721 and ANSI T1.301 & T1.303 drafts (voice and
music)
- and proprietary compression (AADCT, lossless)
Optibase MPEG Lab Pro and MPEG Lab +. Phone: 214-386-2040 or 800-451-510
Motorola - DSP56002 (fixed-point 40MHz version of the 56001)
AT&T JPEG coder (George Warner <warnergt@aloft.att.com>)
- runs on a DSP3210 under the VCOS operating system.
The coder can be used to simultaneously compress/decompress
multiple images and/or be used in conjunction with other DSP
modules to preprocess or postprocess the image data.
Other modules available for the DSP3210 include audio coders
(such as MPEG, SBC, CDXA, and G.722), modem/fax data pumps
(V.32bis, V.22bis, and V.29), DTMF, call progress detection,
sample rate conversion, and more.
MWave - TI, IBM, Intermetrics multimedia system, due from IBM in 1993.
Misc. NuBus boards - RasterOps , Radius, Mass Microsystems, Orange Micro,
IBM M - - Motion.
P.OEM - Interated Systems Inc. fractal compression boards for the PC.
404-840-0310
two desktop video conferencing products for Sparc's
with the Parallax XVIDEO board:
Communique! - desktop video conferencing products for Sparcs with the Parallax
XVIDEO board:
InSoft, Inc., 4718 Old Gettsburg Road, Executive Park West I, Suite 307
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055, USA. email: info@insoft.com
phone: 717-730-9501, fax: 717-730-9504
PSVC - desktop video conferencing products for Sparcs with the Parallax
XVIDEO board:
Paradise Software, Inc., 55 Princeton Heightstown Rd, Suite 109
Princeton, NJ 08550, USA. email: support@paradise.com
phone: 609-275-4475, fax: 609-275-4702
North Valley Research - video and other time-based media in a UNIX environment
North Valley Research; 15262 NW Greenbriar Pkwy; Beaverton, OR 97006
Phone (503) 531-5707, Fax (503) 690-2320. Todd Brunhoff <toddb@nvr.com>
Visionetics MPEG MasterTM for 386 PC. phone (310) 316-7940,
fax (310) 316-7457, e-mail 72622.2112@compuserve.com.
MPEG Video compliant with ISO-11172
Up to 16 million colors regardless of VGA card or VGA mode
704 x 480 NTSC, 704x576 PAL resolution
Full motion video NTSC ( 30 fps), Pal (25 fps)
VIGABUSTM high speed digital video bus
MPEG audio Layer I and II
16 bit stereo digital audio playback
20 Hz - 20 KHz frequency response
Stereo headphone/preamp output
RealMagic board. Sigma Designs, 510-770-0100
- MPEG Audio and Video playback board (ISA bus). Full compliance with
ISO CD 11172. Supports 30 fps (NTSC), and 25 fps (PAL).
- MPEG sound standards - Layer I and II.
- On-board CD ROM interface (not on RealMagic Lite board)
RealMagic Producer. Sigma Designs, 510-770-0100
- Video/Audio Capture and MPEG encoding controller (PCI bus).
- Compressed Data Format: MPEG-1, 352x240 (NTSC), 352x288 (PAL).
- Audio Capture - MPEG-1, Layer I and II. 44.1 kHz sampling frequency.
- Require Pentium system, 16 MB RAM, fast SCSI hard drive.
Boards Under Development
------------------------
Matrox - Matrox Studio line of PC boards will include a 64-bit MOVIE bus and
JPEG compression.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [99] Acknowledgments
There are too many people to cite. Thanks to all people who directly
or indirectly contributed to this FAQ.