Performance evaluation of Motion-JPEG2000 in comparison with H.264/AVC operated in pure intracoding mode

Abstract

Recently, two new international image and video coding standards have been released: the wavelet-based JPEG2000 standard designed basically for compressing still images, and H.264/AVC, the newest generic standard for video coding. As part of the JPEG2000 suite, Motion-JPEG2000 extends JPEG2000 to a range of applications originally associated with a pure video coding standard like H.264/AVC. However, currently little is known about the relative performance of Motion-JPEG2000 and H.264/AVC in terms of coding efficiency on their overlapping domain of target applications requiring the random access of individual pictures. In this paper, we report on a comparative study of the rate-distortion performance of Motion-JPEG2000 and H.264/AVC using a representative set of video material. Our experimental coding results indicate that H.264/AVC performs surprisingly well on individually coded pictures in comparison to the highly sophisticated still image compression technology of JPEG2000. In addition to the rate-distortion analysis, we also provide a brief comparison of the evaluated coding algorithms in terms of complexity and functionality.

On comparing JPEG2000 and intraframe AVC

“…This is not our case since the gain of AVC HP over JPEG2000 is around 0.6 dB at average bit rates and 0.3 dB at high bit rates. In addition, it is reported in [5] and [3] that AVC HP Intra outperforms JPEG2000 for the Harbour sequence with a gain around 0.8 ~ 1.0 db. In our case, the gain is around 0.2 in favor of AVC HP Intra at average bit rates and in favor of JPEG2000 at high bit rates.…”

“…In [3], a performance evaluation of AVC MP Intra and JPEG200 was conducted. It is reported that AVC Intra performs better than JPEG2000 in terms of rate-distortion performance for low and intermediate resolution sequences.…”

Optical Network Technologies for Future Digital Cinema

“…DCI specifies JPEG2000 as the video compression standard; however other video coding standards could also be considered. A comparison between JPEG2000 and H.264 is provided in [25][26][27] concluding that JPEG2000 provides better performance at high resolutions Advances in Optical Technologies 3 HEVC [29] offers approximately twice the compression compared to H.264/AVC standard at the same data rate. Because of its high compression efficiency it will ease pressure on the global networks [5] and is an enabler for HD content over mobile networks [30].…”

Jointly Optimized Spatial Prediction and Block Transform for Video and Image Coding

“…Simulations demonstrate that the proposed hybrid transform coding scheme consistently achieves remarkable bit savings at the same peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR). Note that the intra-mode in H.264/AVC, which utilizes spatial prediction followed by the DCT, has been shown to provide better rate-distortion performance than wavelet-based Motion-JPEG2000 at low-to-medium frame/image resolutions [e.g., Common Intermediate Format (CIF) and Quarter CIF (QCIF)] [3]. Hence, the proposed block-based hybrid transform coding scheme is of significant benefit to still-image coding as well.…”