3 ms·

How does it compare to fax Group 4 compression [1] or JBIG2 [2] for 1bpp -e.g. black and white- images? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_4_compression h

by faragon 10y ago

How does it compare to fax Group 4 compression [1] or JBIG2 [2] for 1bpp -e.g. black and white- images? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_4_compression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_4_compression [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JBIG2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JBIG2

jonsneyers 10y ago
Very good question. Do you or anyone else have a good test set of such images? My gut feeling says that JBIG2 probably outperforms FLIF on repetitive images (e.g. text), since it specifically detects such patterns. On non-repetitive images, maybe FLIF is better. But it would be nice to have some benchmarks.
boramalper 10y ago
> Patents for JBIG2 are owned by IBM and Mitsubishi.
- faragon 10y ago
  I was interested in how they compare in compression terms. Anyway, remaining JBIG2 patents expire in 2019.
jonsneyers 10y ago
Here are some results for a few black & white images from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PD-ScottForesman https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PD-ScottForesman : (I only compare to JBIG2, not Group 4, since JBIG2 is supposed to be the best of those two) JBIG2 FLIF PNG 11690 10903 27093 1971_San_Jose_Scale_Scales_on_Branch 10458 9761 23466 1971_San_Jose_Scale_Winged_Adult 44809 44301 105555 Accommodation_ladder 15966 14882 44073 Aconite 27031 25877 59353 Adder 13569 13302 40317 Adenoids 36409 35058 84826 African_elephant 6890 6899 12982 Aft 24465 23170 51297 Agate_A-40 18969 17896 24261 Aisle 8612 8590 23408 Allen_wrench_and_screw 9968 9104 11792 Alpaca 12258 11952 36657 Alternately 196083 192611 254895 Amazon_River 76572 73529 105637 Arabian_Sea 275124 256820 311448 Archery_colored 139482 137329 162432 Argonne_Forest 40681 39952 70999 Astrolabe 24950 23317 32007 Brace 43808 41113 116671 Deer_2
- faragon 10y ago
  Thank you! It looks amazing. So unless processing speed or memory requirements being a handicap, the FLIF could be a real generic graphics compression candidate :-)
  - jonsneyers 10y ago
    Yes, that's the goal :)
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

by faragon 10y ago

jonsneyers 10y ago

Very good question. Do you or anyone else have a good test set of such images? My gut feeling says that JBIG2 probably outperforms FLIF on repetitive images (e.g. text), since it specifically detects such patterns. On non-repetitive images, maybe FLIF is better. But it would be nice to have some benchmarks.

boramalper 10y ago

> Patents for JBIG2 are owned by IBM and Mitsubishi.

faragon 10y ago
I was interested in how they compare in compression terms. Anyway, remaining JBIG2 patents expire in 2019.

jonsneyers 10y ago

Here are some results for a few black & white images from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PD-ScottForesman https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PD-ScottForesman : (I only compare to JBIG2, not Group 4, since JBIG2 is supposed to be the best of those two) JBIG2 FLIF PNG 11690 10903 27093 1971_San_Jose_Scale_Scales_on_Branch 10458 9761 23466 1971_San_Jose_Scale_Winged_Adult 44809 44301 105555 Accommodation_ladder 15966 14882 44073 Aconite 27031 25877 59353 Adder 13569 13302 40317 Adenoids 36409 35058 84826 African_elephant 6890 6899 12982 Aft 24465 23170 51297 Agate_A-40 18969 17896 24261 Aisle 8612 8590 23408 Allen_wrench_and_screw 9968 9104 11792 Alpaca 12258 11952 36657 Alternately 196083 192611 254895 Amazon_River 76572 73529 105637 Arabian_Sea 275124 256820 311448 Archery_colored 139482 137329 162432 Argonne_Forest 40681 39952 70999 Astrolabe 24950 23317 32007 Brace 43808 41113 116671 Deer_2

faragon 10y ago
Thank you! It looks amazing. So unless processing speed or memory requirements being a handicap, the FLIF could be a real generic graphics compression candidate :-)
- jonsneyers 10y ago
  Yes, that's the goal :)
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]