flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
Index
> High Level Languages > understanding jpg decompression Goto page 1, 2 Next 
Author 

vivik
Here is the simplest demonstration of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2aEzeMDHMA
I want to understand the code that is used in libjpegturbo for decompressing jpg, specifically the code for inverse discrete cosine transform. There are multiple versions of this code, but I found "float" version to be the simplest: https://github.com/libjpegturbo/libjpegturbo/blob/master/jidctflt.c Quote: * This implementation is based on Arai, Agui, and Nakajima's algorithm for I guess I need to find either that Arai, Agui, and Nakajima's paper, or that Pennebaker & Mitchell book somewhere to understand that code. Other versions are "slow integer" (jidctint.c simd/jidctintsse2.asm) and "fast integer" (jfdctfst.c simd/jidctfstsse2.asm). I'd like to understand all of them. 

04 May 2018, 19:27 

donn
I'm less familiar with DCT, but I think it's similar to the Discrete Fourier Transform (and its inverse). You can represent a signal (such as sound) in the time domain, or spatially if you are dealing with a single twodimensional image. The Fourier Transform or DCT I think, provides a means to represent that signal in terms of frequencies (the concept of frequency content).
Frequency, by its nature, involves repetitions, so compression can take advantage of these 'redundancies.' The transform involves coefficients which are these building blocks which can be 'decompressed' back to the spatial or time domain (decompressing a JPEG). Fourier thought you could break any signal (sequence of numbers) down into a sum of sines, which some mathematicians thought was impossible. Where the DCT uses cosines (I think in this same way), DFT uses sines and cosines, or analogous complex numbers using Euler's identities. I have H. Joseph Weaver's "Applications of Discrete and Continuous Fourier Analysis" and it's on my todo to implement a CooleyTukey FFT down the road. There are online calculators for some of this stuff, so if you feed in a series of numbers, you can verify the output. I've got Discrete Convolution/Faltung down so far (verified here), but this frequency stuff is very interesting. Mathworks DCT link, showing the principal functions and descriptions of the terms. 

04 May 2018, 20:12 

pabloreda
I code in r4 a jpeg decompress, if you can read a forth like lang, this is the code
https://github.com/phreda4/reda4/blob/master/r4/Lib/loadjpg.txt I use fixed point , the code in this file decompress a file for test and can be use like library. Is a translation of a c code. 

04 May 2018, 23:40 

donn
Wow, r4 is very mature, seems like it has many capabilities.
So the jpeg lib can leverage r4asm to generate fasmstyle asm? 

05 May 2018, 00:28 

pabloreda
yes, hit f5 in the editor, and this generate the source code in r4asm/ folder and compile with fasm, the code generator is not very well, I need improve this!


05 May 2018, 03:21 

Siekmanski
sin( PI / 360 * 90 ) = 0.707106781
sin( PI / 360 * 45 ) = 0.382683433 sqrt(2.0) = 1.414213562 

05 May 2018, 06:58 

vivik
wow


05 May 2018, 07:29 

Siekmanski
If you don't want to use sqrt , you can calculate sqrt(2) as,
sin( PI / 360 * 90 ) * 2 = 1.414213562 

05 May 2018, 08:56 

vivik
I found this "flowgraph" here:
https://github.com/prtsh/aan_dct https://web.archive.org/web/20100613221721/http://www.ece.ucdavis.edu/cerl/ReliableJPEG/Cung/dct.html https://books.google.com/books?id=AepB_PZ_WMkC&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&ots=USEOcx5SqG&focus=viewport&dq=Pennebaker+%26+Mitchell+figure+48 If you go from left to right, it's "DCT", compression. If you go from right to left, it's decompression. I don't understand what those black dots, white dots and arrows mean. a1 = 0.707 a2 = 0.541 a3 = 0.707 //same as a1 a4 = 1.307 a5 = 0.383
Last edited by vivik on 15 May 2018, 17:02; edited 4 times in total 

05 May 2018, 12:30 

vivik
So, about different dct algorithms:
[1] and [2] mention AraiAguiNakajima (AAN) algorithm, LoefflerLigtenbergMoschytz (LLM), and Feig and Winograd algorithm. MPEG [1] [2] uses incompatible with jpeg implementation of dct, which is fast but less accurate. [2] describes dct that is as fast as MPEG decompression [3] [4] [5] mention dct that doesn't need any multiplication whatsoever, it uses binary shifts only. I guess this is incompatible with jpg? [1] http://media.taricorp.net/fast_dct.pdf Using Streaming SIMD Extensions in a Fast DCT Algorithm for MPEG Encoding [2] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~barbic/cs740/ap922.pdf A Fast Precise Implementation of 8x8 Discrete Cosine Transform Using the Streaming SIMD Extensions and MMX™ Instructions [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XR "The DCT, the frequency transformation used by JPEG, is slightly lossy because of roundoff error. JPEG XR uses a type of integer transform employing a lifting scheme.[22] The required transform, called the Photo Core Transform (PCT), resembles a 4 × 4 DCT but is lossless (exactly invertible). In fact, it is a particular realization of a larger family of binaryfriendly multiplierless transforms called the binDCT." [4] http://www.sfu.ca/~jiel/bindct.html [5] https://www.vcodex.com/h264avc4x4transformandquantization/ "This approximation is chosen to minimise the complexity of implementing the transform (multiplication by Cf requires only additions and binary shifts) whilst maintaining good compression performance." 

05 May 2018, 13:03 

vivik
This binary dct is very intriguing. Can you use it with jpg, or maybe jpglike format? Decompression speed is just as important for me as compression ratio.
Hm, this paper answers this question: http://thanglong.ece.jhu.edu/Tran/Pub/binDCTVLSI.pdf Same speed, mostly same quality. Can save electricity with proper hardware support. 

05 May 2018, 13:13 

donn
Hi, on the DCT side, I looked into the Matlab equations more and was able to compute and verify some results. Have to catch a train in a couple mins, so this is a bit rushed. I can elaborate points later if needed.
You can start breaking the two dimensional equations down by zeroing out some components and increasing the input size incrementally. I didn't find many online 2D calculators to verify results with, but did find a 1D calculator as one of the first search engine results. I took a few simple input examples, such as: {(3,0),(4,0)} or even {(3,0),(0,0)} each with rowCount and columnCount of 2. In the transform result matrix at index x,y (each base0), you would multiply an input (such as one of the 3's above at coords 0,0) by cos((PI(2*rowIndex+1)*x)/(2*rowCount)) * cos((PI(2*columnIndex+1)*x)/(2*columnCount)) You then add each of the other input values, with the x,y values constant (since they are only going into this one destination slot in the result matrix. Once you have the sums, you multiply by two other scalars, one for the destination x coordinate, the other for the destination matrix y coordinate. The value for each is calculated as: When the destination x or y is 0, the scalar value is 1/(sqrt(rowCount)) (replacing rowCount with colCount when computing the y equivalent). When the destination index is not 0, the value is similar, but 1/(sqrt(2/rowCount)). So then you just multiply these, the sum, and these two scalar values. In the case above where you rowcount and colCount are both 2, the two values would be approximately 0.707106781186547 and 0.707106781186547 at index 0,0. The inverse transform works on the matrix that was computed to retrive the original using a pretty similar method, but rearranging when the scalars are multiplied. So for the inputs used above (the first one), dct matrix result should be ((3.5,3.5),(0.5,0.5)) Gotta catch this train. r4's fasm output may have some readable asm of the dct, as mentioned earlier. 

09 May 2018, 20:34 

alexfru
vivik wrote: If you go from left to right, it's "DCT", compression. If you go from right to left, it's decompression. I don't understand what those black dots, white dots and arrows mean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_diagram 

10 May 2018, 04:25 

vivik
Found yet another variant of dct. Unfortunately, it's behind the paywall.
https://jpeg.org/jpegxs/ >with very low latency and very low complexity. https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.07414 >Multiplierless 16point DCT Approximation for Lowcomplexity Image and Video Coding >requiring only 44 additionsthe lowest arithmetic cost in literature. https://www.dpreview.com/news/7572625808/thenewjpegxsimageformatwasbuiltforstreaming4kandvrcontent >The new JPEG XS image format was built for streaming 4K and VR content >What’s interesting is that JPEG isn’t trying to shrink the file size with JPEG XS. In fact, quite the opposite. Whereas the JPEG standard has a compression ratio of about 10:1, JPEG XS comes out to a 6:1 ratio. 

14 May 2018, 10:30 

vivik
I don't understand anything in that butterfly diagram...
here is code for forward dct, from jfdctflt.c Code: tmp0 = dataptr[0] + dataptr[7]; tmp7 = dataptr[0]  dataptr[7]; tmp1 = dataptr[1] + dataptr[6]; tmp6 = dataptr[1]  dataptr[6]; tmp2 = dataptr[2] + dataptr[5]; tmp5 = dataptr[2]  dataptr[5]; tmp3 = dataptr[3] + dataptr[4]; tmp4 = dataptr[3]  dataptr[4]; /* Even part */ tmp10 = tmp0 + tmp3; /* phase 2 */ tmp13 = tmp0  tmp3; tmp11 = tmp1 + tmp2; tmp12 = tmp1  tmp2; dataptr[0] = tmp10 + tmp11; /* phase 3 */ dataptr[4] = tmp10  tmp11; z1 = (tmp12 + tmp13) * 0.707106781; /* c4 */ dataptr[2] = tmp13 + z1; /* phase 5 */ dataptr[6] = tmp13  z1; /* Odd part */ tmp10 = tmp4 + tmp5; /* phase 2 */ tmp11 = tmp5 + tmp6; tmp12 = tmp6 + tmp7; /* The rotator is modified from fig 48 to avoid extra negations. */ z5 = (tmp10  tmp12) * 0.382683433; /* c6 */ z2 = 0.541196100 * tmp10 + z5; /* c2c6 */ z4 = 1.306562965 * tmp12 + z5; /* c2+c6 */ z3 = tmp11 * 0.707106781; /* c4 */ z11 = tmp7 + z3; /* phase 5 */ z13 = tmp7  z3; dataptr[5] = z13 + z2; /* phase 6 */ dataptr[3] = z13  z2; dataptr[1] = z11 + z4; dataptr[7] = z11  z4; here is inverse dct, from jidctflt.c Code: /* Even part */ tmp0 = inptr[0]; tmp1 = inptr[2]; tmp2 = inptr[4]; tmp3 = inptr[6]; tmp10 = tmp0 + tmp2; /* phase 3 */ tmp11 = tmp0  tmp2; tmp13 = tmp1 + tmp3; /* phases 53 */ tmp12 = (tmp1  tmp3) * 1.414213562  tmp13; /* 2*c4 */ tmp0 = tmp10 + tmp13; /* phase 2 */ tmp3 = tmp10  tmp13; tmp1 = tmp11 + tmp12; tmp2 = tmp11  tmp12; /* Odd part */ tmp4 = inptr[1]; tmp5 = inptr[3]; tmp6 = inptr[5]; tmp7 = inptr[7]; z13 = tmp6 + tmp5; /* phase 6 */ z10 = tmp6  tmp5; z11 = tmp4 + tmp7; z12 = tmp4  tmp7; tmp7 = z11 + z13; /* phase 5 */ tmp11 = (z11  z13) * 1.414213562; /* 2*c4 */ z5 = (z10 + z12) * 1.847759065; /* 2*c2 */ tmp10 = z5  z12 * 1.082392200; /* 2*(c2c6) */ tmp12 = z5  z10 * 2.613125930; /* 2*(c2+c6) */ tmp6 = tmp12  tmp7; /* phase 2 */ tmp5 = tmp11  tmp6; tmp4 = tmp10  tmp5; wsptr[0] = tmp0 + tmp7; wsptr[7] = tmp0  tmp7; wsptr[1] = tmp1 + tmp6; wsptr[6] = tmp1  tmp6; wsptr[2] = tmp2 + tmp5; wsptr[5] = tmp2  tmp5; wsptr[3] = tmp3 + tmp4; wsptr[4] = tmp3  tmp4; I can't make sense out of this. I removed some unrelated things like quantization, and turned 2d transformation to 1d, 8 numbers on input and 8 numbers on output. I need to read those papers. 

15 May 2018, 14:30 

vivik
Simplified it a bit more, and confirmed that this actually works:
Code: #include <stdio.h> int main() { float arr[8] = {0, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 0}; printf("%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f\n\n\n", arr[0], arr[1], arr[2], arr[3], arr[4], arr[5], arr[6], arr[7]); { float t0 = arr[0] + arr[7]; float t7 = arr[0]  arr[7]; float t1 = arr[1] + arr[6]; float t6 = arr[1]  arr[6]; float t2 = arr[2] + arr[5]; float t5 = arr[2]  arr[5]; float t3 = arr[3] + arr[4]; float t4 = arr[3]  arr[4]; /* Even part */ float t10 = t0 + t3; /* phase 2 */ float t13 = t0  t3; float t11 = t1 + t2; float t12 = t1  t2; arr[0] = t10 + t11; /* phase 3 */ arr[4] = t10  t11; float z1 = (t12 + t13) * 0.707106781; /* c4 */ arr[2] = t13 + z1; /* phase 5 */ arr[6] = t13  z1; /* Odd part */ t10 = t4 + t5; /* phase 2 */ t11 = t5 + t6; t12 = t6 + t7; /* The rotator is modified from fig 48 to avoid extra negations. */ float z5 = (t10  t12) * 0.382683433; /* c6 */ float z2 = 0.541196100 * t10 + z5; /* c2c6 */ float z4 = 1.306562965 * t12 + z5; /* c2+c6 */ float z3 = t11 * 0.707106781; /* c4 */ float z11 = t7 + z3; /* phase 5 */ float z13 = t7  z3; arr[5] = z13 + z2; /* phase 6 */ arr[3] = z13  z2; arr[1] = z11 + z4; arr[7] = z11  z4; } printf("%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f\n\n\n", arr[0], arr[1], arr[2], arr[3], arr[4], arr[5], arr[6], arr[7]); { /* Even part */ float t0 = arr[0]; float t1 = arr[2]; float t2 = arr[4]; float t3 = arr[6]; float t10 = t0 + t2; /* phase 3 */ float t11 = t0  t2; float t13 = t1 + t3; /* phases 53 */ float t12 = (t1  t3) * 1.414213562  t13; /* 2*c4 */ t0 = t10 + t13; /* phase 2 */ t3 = t10  t13; t1 = t11 + t12; t2 = t11  t12; /* Odd part */ float t4 = arr[1]; float t5 = arr[3]; float t6 = arr[5]; float t7 = arr[7]; float z13 = t6 + t5; /* phase 6 */ float z10 = t6  t5; float z11 = t4 + t7; float z12 = t4  t7; t7 = z11 + z13; /* phase 5 */ t11 = (z11  z13) * 1.414213562; /* 2*c4 */ float z5 = (z10 + z12) * 1.847759065; /* 2*c2 */ t10 = z5  z12 * 1.082392200; /* 2*(c2c6) */ t12 = z5  z10 * 2.613125930; /* 2*(c2+c6) */ t6 = t12  t7; /* phase 2 */ t5 = t11  t6; t4 = t10  t5; arr[0] = t0 + t7; arr[7] = t0  t7; arr[1] = t1 + t6; arr[6] = t1  t6; arr[2] = t2 + t5; arr[5] = t2  t5; arr[3] = t3 + t4; arr[4] = t3  t4; } printf("%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f\n\n\n", arr[0], arr[1], arr[2], arr[3], arr[4], arr[5], arr[6], arr[7]); { arr[0] = arr[0]/8; arr[1] = arr[1]/8; arr[2] = arr[2]/8; arr[3] = arr[3]/8; arr[4] = arr[4]/8; arr[5] = arr[5]/8; arr[6] = arr[6]/8; arr[7] = arr[7]/8; } printf("%f %f %f %f %f %f %f %f\n\n\n", arr[0], arr[1], arr[2], arr[3], arr[4], arr[5], arr[6], arr[7]); getchar(); } Output is: Code: 0.000000 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 3.000000 3.000000 2.000000 0.000000 14.000000 2.720777 11.656855 1.955410 2.000000 0.873017 0.343146 0.107651 0.000000 8.000000 16.000000 24.000000 24.000000 24.000000 16.000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000 2.000000 3.000000 3.000000 3.000000 2.000000 0.000000 

15 May 2018, 16:43 

vivik
Okay, I can read butterfly diagrams now. Lines are additions, lines with arrows are substractions (i guess because for substraction the direction is important, unlike for addition), boxes with a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 are multiplications by this constant number. Black and white circles don't mean anything, they probably indicate direction, doesn't matter.
I can follow most of the code, except this part in inverse dct: Code: float z5 = (z10 + z12) * 1.847759065; /* 2*c2 */ t10 = z5  z12 * 1.082392200; /* 2*(c2c6) */ t12 = z5  z10 * 2.613125930; /* 2*(c2+c6) */ It looks like code comments use those weird c2 c4 c6 constants, and I know only a1 a2 a3 a4 a5. Most of those constants are just divisions, turned into multiplications, (instead of dividing by a1, they multiply by 1/a1 instead. Same result, but slightly faster). Yet this 1.082392200 constant is 1 / 0.923, and there is no such number. Code: a1 and a3 1.414213562 0.707 a2 1.8477 0.541 ????? 1.082392200 0.923 ???? it should be a4 = 1.307 a5 2.613125930 0.3826 

16 May 2018, 06:00 

vivik
wait, I think I found what c2 c4 c6 mean.
https://unix4lyfe.org/dct1d/ >For brevity, let's define: >c0 = sqrt(1/2)*sqrt(2/N) >cj = cos(pi * j / 16) * sqrt(2/N) then, let's check that 2*(c2c6) == 1.082392200 c2 = cos(pi * 2 / 16) * sqrt(2 / 8) c6 = cos(pi * 6 / 16) * sqrt(2 / 8) well, i just typed this into google: 2 * ( (cos(pi * 2 / 16) * sqrt(2 / 8))  (cos(pi * 6 / 16) * sqrt(2 / 8)) ) and got 0.54119610014 ...that's exactly twice as small as what I expected. How odd. I guess without sqrt(2/8) it will be exact... Hm, this is what @Siekmanski was talking about... 

16 May 2018, 15:12 

vivik
0.707 = 1.414 / 2
0.707 = 1 / 1.414 0.707 = c4 = cos(pi * 4 / 16) = cos(45 grad) = cos(45 degrees) = sqrt(2)/2 wow How would you prove that 1 / cos(45 degrees) = cos(45 degrees) / 2 ? 

16 May 2018, 16:46 

Goto page 1, 2 Next < Last Thread  Next Thread > 
Forum Rules:

Copyright © 19992020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube, Twitter.
Website powered by rwasa.