This document provides an overview and illustration of JPEG 2000, a new image compression standard that replaces JPEG. It explains key features like tile division, progression order, quantization, discrete wavelet transformation, DC level shifting, and region of interest encoding. Graphs show that JPEG 2000 provides much smaller file sizes than JPEG while maintaining higher image quality. The conclusion states that JPEG 2000 offers excellent compression, fully exploits discrete wavelet transformation, and is well-suited for hardware implementation, establishing it as the most advanced image compression standard.

1. A Quick Illustration of
JPEG 2000
Presented by
Kim-Huei Low
Chun Data Fok

2. Overview
 Introduction
 Approach
 Illustration
 Annex B-H
 Comparison with JPEG
 Conclusion
 References
 Questions
Figure:
Picture of Data using
JPEG (75%
compression ratio,
15KB)
Figure:
Picture of Kim
using J2K
(0.5bpp,
3.8KB)

3. Introduction
 JPEG 2000
 Drafted by the international JPEG (Joint Bi-
level Image Experts Group) and JBIG (Joint
Photographic Experts Group) groups.
 Replaces traditional JPEG.
 Focuses on hardware implementation.
 Our goal
 Present a simplified version of the standard.
 Give new users a grasp of JPEG 2000.

4. Approach
 Follow the same order
as the standard.
 Explain the
background.
 Illustrate each feature.
 Discuss its
applications.
 List the pros and cons.
 Will skip Annex A, C
and D.
 Feature wise, it’s not
important.
Figure: 0.25bpp J2K Image (11KB);
Raw Image’s Size is 1MB

5. Illustration: Annex B
 Tile division
 Large images
can be broken
down into
smaller pieces,
called tiles.
 Tiles are
processed
independently
Figure: Original DWT Figure: Precinct Selection
Figure: Sub-band Selection Figure: Code-block Selection

6. Illustration: Annex B
 Progression Order
 Layer or Resolution Progressive
Figure: 1bpp, 0.5bpp, 0.05bpp and 0.01bpp J2K Image with Layer or Resolution Progression.

7. Illustration: Annex B
 Progression Order
 Component Progressive
Figure: 1bpp, 0.5bpp, 0.1bpp and 0.01bpp J2K Image with Component Progression.

8. Illustration: Annex B
 Progression Order
 Position Progressive
Figure: 1bpp, 0.5bpp and 0.1bpp J2K Image with Position Progression.

9. Illustration: Annex E
 Quantization
 Reversible vs Irreversible
 Target bit rate=0.5 bpp
 Step size=1
Figure: Reversible Quantization
(16KB)
Figure: Irreversible Explicit
Quantization (868B)
Figure: Irreversible Implicit
Quantization (787B)

10. Illustration: Annex E
 Irreversible Explicit Quantization
 Target bit rate=0.5 bpp
 Different step size
Figure: Step Size 1 (868B) Figure: Step Size 0.1 (11.9KB) Figure: Step Size 0.0078 (16.3KB)

11. Illustration: Annex E
 Irreversible Implicit Quantization
 Target bit rate=0.5 bpp
 Different step size
Figure: Step Size 1 (787B) Figure: Step Size 0.1 (11.7KB) Figure: Step Size 0.0078 (16.3KB)

12. Illustration: Annex F
 Discrete Wavelet Transformation (DWT)
 Reversible = 5x3 filter (lossless compression)
 Irreversible = 9x7 filter (efficient lossy compression)

13. Illustration: Annex F
 Lossless vs Lossy DWT
 Different decomposition level
 Higher decomposition levels – higher overhead
Figure: Lossless,
NL=14 (275KB)
Figure: Lossy,
NL=14 (99KB)
Figure: Lossless,
NL=3 (274KB)
Figure: Lossy, NL=3
(98KB)

14. Illustration: Annex F
 Discard of high frequency sub-bands
 High compression, smaller file size
 Same quality
 Amortize decomposition level overhead
 Optimal/Ideal: Encode up to the last visually
distinguishable low frequency sub-band
Figure: NL=3,
8.3636bpp (274KB)
Figure: NL=14,
0.9948bpp (32.6KB)

15. Illustration: Annex G
 DC Level Shifting
 Similar to JPEG
 New pixel value = Pixel value - 128
 Component Decorrelating Transformation
 Reversible vs Irreversible
Figure: Raw Image; 0.035bpp J2K Image with RCT; 0.035bpp J2K Image with ICT

16. Illustration: Annex H
 Region of Interest (ROI) Encoding
 Efficient use of bit rate
 If bit rate is too low, encoding without ROI
may look better overall
Figure: Raw Image; 0.07bpp J2K Image with ROI; 0.07bpp J2K Image without ROI

17. Illustration: Comparison of JPEG 2000
with JPEG
 10 test images, 50+ compression ratios
 PSNR vs File Size











−
×
=
∑xy
yxfyxg
MN
PSNR
|),(),(|
255
log10 10
PSNR vs File Size
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000
File Size (bytes)
PSNR(dB)
JPEG
JPEG 2000
Figure: PSNR Curve

18. Illustration: Comparison of JPEG 2000
with JPEG
 Much smaller files
 Much better quality
Figure: 0.08bpp J2K Image (8KB); 0.1563bpp JPEG Image (16KB);

19. Conclusion
 Excellent compression rate
 Fully exploits the advantage of DWT
 Capable of handling extremely large
images
 Lots of user-selectable features
 Efficient for hardware implementation
 Most advanced image compression
standard
 Implication of MPEG 2000?

20. References
 International Telecommunication Union (ITU),
International Organization for Standardization
(ISO), “JPEG 2000 Implementation in Java,”
http://jpeg2000.epfl.ch, October 16th, 2003.
 ISO/IEC JTCI/SC29 WGI, JPEG 2000 Editor
Martin Boliek, Charilaos Christopoulos, Eric
Majani, “JPEG 2000 Image Coding System,”
http://www.jpeg.org/CDs15444.html, March
16th, 2000.