Encryption of data is translating data to another shape or symbol which enables people only with an access to the secret key or a password that can read it. The data which are encrypted are generally referred to as cipher text, while data which are unencrypted are known plain text. Entropy can be used as a measure which gives the number of bits that are needed for coding the data of an image. As the values of pixel within an image are dispensed through further gray-levels, the entropy increases. The aim of this research is to compare between CAST-128 with proposed adaptive key and RSA encryption methods for video frames to determine the more accurate method with highest entropy. The first method is achieved by applying the "CAST-128" and the second is achieved by applying the "RSA ". CAST-128 utilizes a pair of sub-keys for each round as a quantum of  five bits that was utilized as a key of rotation for each round and a quantum of 32 (bits) was utilized as a key of masking into a round . The proposed adaptive 128-bits key can be extracted from the main diagonal of each frame before encryption. RSA is a public-key cryptographic technique which can be known as (asymmetric) cryptography. An asymmetry of a key depends on factoring a product of two big prime values. A comparison was applied on several videos and the results showed that CAST-128 method proved the highest degree of entropy even if the frames have lots of distorted data or unclear image pixels. For example, the entropy value of a sample of a girl video is 2581.921 when using CAST-128, while it is 2271.329 when using the RSA; also the entropy value of a sample of a scooter video is 2569.814 when using the CAST-128, while it is 2282.844 when using RSA.

Although the number of stomach tumor patients reduced obviously during last decades in western countries, but this illness is still one of the main causes of death in developing countries. The aim of this research is to detect the area of a tumor in a stomach images based on fuzzy clustering. The proposed methodology consists of three stages. The stomach images are divided into four quarters and then features elicited from each quarter in the first stage by utilizing seven moments invariant. Fuzzy C-Mean clustering (FCM) was employed in the second stage for each quarter to collect the features of each quarter into clusters. Manhattan distance was calculated in the third stage among all clusters' centers in all quarters to disclosure of the quarter that contains a tumor based on the centroid value of the cluster in this quarter, which is far from the centers of the remaining quarters. From the calculations conducted on several images' quarters, the experimental outcomes show that the centroid value of the cluster in each quarter was greater than 0.9 if this quarter did not contain a tumor while the value of the centroid value for the cluster containing a tumor was less than 0.4.For examples, in a quarter no.1 for STOMACH_1 medical image, the centroid value of the cluster was 0.973 while the value of the cluster centroid in quarter no.3 was 0.280. For this reason the tumor area was found in quarter no.(3) of the medical image STOMACH_1. Also, the centroid value of the cluster in a quarter no.2 was 0.948 for STOMACH_2 while, the value of the cluster centroid in quarter no.4 was 0.397. For this reason the tumor area was found in a quarter no.4 of the medical image STOMACH_2.

For the reason of colossal technological developments, the requirement of image information methods became a significant issue. The aim of this research was to retrieve the word based on Fast Retina Key-points (FREAK) descriptor .The suggested system consists of four stages. In the first stage, the images of English letters are loaded.  Points are detected via SUSAN in the second stage. FREAK used in the third stage and then a database was created containing 26 English letters. The image to be tested was entered and the points are extracted in the fourth stage and then Manhattan distance was used to calculate the distance between the value of the test image descriptors and all the values of the descriptors in a database. The experimental results show that the precision and the recall values were high for retrieval of the words when using SUSAN because it extracts a large number of interest points compared to the Harris method. For example, for the letter H was 104 with SUSAN while it was 42 for Harris, therefore; the precision for retrieval of the word Hour was 89% and recall was 93% when using SUSAN while precision was 77% and recall was 80% when using Harris.

Speedy increase in the employ of the content of multimedia is very commonly perceived in existing generations. Video is one of the extreme exceedingly recovered data of multimedia which can provide quick fixes and immediate gratification for whole the kinds of user information willingness. Detection of Key frame from Videos and classification of videos are the necessary protocols in the complements tasks of video retrieval. The aim of this research is to compare between histogram similarity and histogram differencing for more brief key frames extraction from video stream. The suggested system for key frame extraction has three steps. Firstly, the video frames series will take and the characteristics for points of interest are elicited utilizing SUSAN detector. After eliciting interest characteristics from all video frames images, secondly, K-Means clustering technique was utilized for these features to construct the clusters with a number of interest points. Thirdly, a histogram builds for each video frame based on numbers of features in each cluster. X-axis of a histogram represents the cluster number and y-axis represents the number of features in each cluster. For key frames extraction, numbers for each cluster can be offered and a query histogram can be constructed based on entered clusters’ numbers. A query histogram was matched with every video frame histogram using Manhattan distance to discover the similar histogram to query histogram. After chosen similar histogram, it can extract all key frames from that video frames. The experimental results show that the number of key frames extracted from the video is very brief when using the histogram similarity compared to the histogram differencing. For example, the number of key frames extracted from a car video is 70 when using the histogram similarity, while it is 180 when using the histogram differencing.