OBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE
HEVC MAIN STILL PICTURE PROFILE
EE5359
Multimedia Project Proposal
Under Guidance of
Dr. K.R.Rao
By
Deepu Sleeba Philip
1001038966
1. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS


















AMVP: Advanced motion vector prediction
AVC: Advanced Video Coding
BD-PSNR: Bjontegaard metric calculation
CB: Coding Block
CIF: Common Intermediate Format
CU: Coding Unit
CTB: Coding Tree Block
CTU: Coding Tree Unit
DCT: Discrete Cosine Transforms
DST: Discrete Sine Transform
EBCOT: Embedded block coding with optimized truncation
GIF: Graphics interchange format
HEVC: High Efficiency Video Coding
HD: High Definition
JCT-VC: Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding
MC: Motion Compensation
ME: Motion Estimation
MPEG: Moving Picture Experts Group



















MSP: Main Still Picture Profile
MV: Motion Vector
NGOV: Next Generation Open Video
PNG: Portable Network Graphics
PSNR: Peak Signal To Noise Ratio
PU: Prediction Unit
QP: Quantization Parameter
QCIF: Quarter Common Intermediate Format
RD: Rate Distortion
SAO: Sample Adaptive Offset
SAD: Sum of Absolute Differences
SATD: Sum of Absolute Transformed Differences (SATD)
SHVC: Scalable HEVC
SSIM: Structural Similarity
SVC: Scalable Video Coding
TM: True Motion
TU: Transform Unit
URQ: Uniform Reconstruction Quantization
VCEG: Video Coding Experts Group
OBJECTIVE
Rate-distortion performance analysis of the
HEVC MSP profile in comparison to WebP
 The peak-signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and the
average bit rate savings in terms of Bjøntegaard
delta rate(BD) is considered
 The implementation complexity will be evaluated
based on the encoding time.

OVERVIEW OF
COMPARISON SCHEMES

JPEG
 Block based transform coding approach
 Step1: Picture is partitioned into nonoverlapping 8x8 blocks.
 Step2:Each of the block is transformed into
freq domain by 2-D DCT.
-transmitted by using entropy coding
based on Huffman Codes.
JPEG XR
 -The image is divided into 4X4 blocks for
transform coding stage.
 -An integer approximation of 4x4 DCT is
used(Photo
Core
Transform)
 -Adaptive Huffman Coding is used for entropy
coding
 JPEG 2000
-Multi resolution approach based on wavelet
transform.
Context Adaptive arithmetic coding

HEVC
Initial goal 50% reduction in bit rate at the same
quality compared to H.264
 Better coding efficiency – more than 35%
reduction in bit rate.
 Support of stereo and multiview
 Increased use of parallel processing
 Resolution :
 HEVC: up to 8k UHD(8192X4320)
 H.264: up to 4K UHD (4096X2160)

ENCODER-DECODER HEVC BLOCK DIAGRAM
Figure.1 [3]
INTRA PREDICTION MODES
IN HEVC
HEVC has 35 luma intra prediction modes (Figure 2)
 Intra prediction can be done at different block sizes,
ranging from 4 X 4 to 64 X 64 (whatever size the PU has)
(Figure 3)
 HEVC also includes a planar and DC intra prediction
modes

•
Figure 2: Modes and directional orientations
for intra picture prediction for HEVC [1]
Figure 3:Luma intra prediction modes
for different PU sizes in HEVC [8]
WEBP


It is based on the intra-frame coding of the VP8
video format[15]
It is a block-based transformation scheme with
eight bits of color depth and a luminancechrominance model with chroma sub sampling by
a ratio of 1:2 (YCbCr4:2:0)
INTRA PREDICTION MODES
IN WEBP

WebP has three types of blocks:
 4x4 luma
 16x16 luma
 8x8 chroma
Modes:
 H_PRED (horizontal prediction): Fills each column
of the block with a copy of the left column, L.
 V_PRED (vertical prediction) : Fills each row of the
block with a copy of the above row, A.
DC_PRED (DC prediction): Fills the block with a single
value using the average of the pixels in the row above A
and the column to the left of L[16].
 TM PRED (True Motion prediction): In addition to the
row A and column L, TM_PRED uses the pixel C above
and to the left of the block. Horizontal differences
between pixels in A and vertical differences between
pixels in L are propagated (starting from C) to form the
prediction block.

WEBP ENCODER BLOCK DIAGRAM
Figure 4.[6]
ANIMATED IMAGE
Figure 5.
Bored_animation.gif [32]
This small gif image of 279x193, this short video weighs as
much as 1.5MB.
The WebP animation above is generated on-the-fly by
Cloudinary when the dynamic URL is accessed.
It looks the same as the original image, but weighs
only 419KB. This means we saved 72% of file size, bandwidth
and load time, compared to the original 1.5MB animated GIF.
IMAGE QUALITY MEASUREMENT
The compression quality can be measured by

Objective quality measure- PSNR, MSE

Structural quality measure- SSIM
MSE and PSNR for a NxM pixel image are
defined as
1
MSE 
M *N
M
N
 xm, n  ym, n(1)
2
m 1 n 1
L2
PSNR  10 log 10
MSE
(2)
dB0
where x is the original image and y is the
reconstructed image. M and N are the width and
height of an image and ‘L’ is the maximum pixel
value in the NxM pixel image.
IMPLEMENTATION
HEVC compression efficiency will be measured
with the HM Test Model [12]. WebP is
downloaded from [19].
 The rate distortion in HEVC and WebP for MSP
is done by plotting graphs for PSNR and BD rate.
 The implementation complexity will be evaluated
based on the encoding time.

REFERENCE






[1] Joint Collaborative Team On Video Coding Information websitehttp://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygroups/20132016/16/Pages/video/jctvc.aspx
[2] H.261: Video Codec for Audiovisual Services at px64 kbit/s,”
http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.261-199303-I/en”
[3] G. J. Sullivan et al, “Overview of the High Efficiency Video Coding
(HEVC) Standard”, IEEE Transactions Circuits and Systems for Video
Technology, Vol. 22, No. 12, pp. 1649-1668, Dec. 2012.
[4] N. Ahmed , T. Natarajan and K.R. Rao, “Discrete Cosine Transform”,
IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol. C-23, pp. 90-93, Jan. 1974.
[5] P.K Ranjan, D. Pacharla, B. Ravindran and D. Mani "Quality
evaluation of HEVC Main Still Picture with limited coding tree depth
and intra modes", Advances in Computing, Communications and
Informatics, New Delhi.
[6] S. Bultje and M. Frost ,Access website
http://www.webmproject.org/vp9/ PPT on “WebM and the new Open
Video Codec”.







[7] M. Budagavi and V. Sze, http://www.rle.mit.edu/eems/wpcontent/uploads/2014/06/H.265-HEVC-Tutorial-2014-ISCAS.pdf, " Design
and Implementation of Next Generation Video Coding Systems
(H.265/HEVC Tutorial)".
[8]
http://www.uta.edu/faculty/krrao/dip/Courses/EE5359/index_tem.html,S.
C Kodpadi ,"Comparative study of Intra Frame Coding efficiency in
HEVC and VP9" EE5359, UTA, spring 2014
[9] J. Bankoski et al, “Towards a Next Generation Open source Video
Codec” SPIE Vol. 8666 Page 2, Dec. 2013.
[10] D. Grois et al, “Performance Comparison of H.265/ MPEG-HEVC,
VP9, and H.264/MPEGAVC Encoders”, IEEE PCS 2013, pp 394-397, San
José, CA, USA, Dec 8-11, 2013
[11] M.P. Sharabayko et al, "Intra Compression Efficiency in VP9 and
HEVC" Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 7, no. 137, pp.6803 – 6824,
Hikari Ltd, 2013
[12] HM Reference Software- https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/HM-doc/
[13]https://hevc.hhi.fraunhofer.de/svn/svn_HEVCSoftware/trunk/doc/soft
ware-manual.pdf








[14] G. Bjøntegaard, “Calculation of average PSNR differences between
RD-curves”, ITU-T Q.6/SG16 VCEG 13th Meeting, Document VCEGM33, Austin, USA, Apr. 2001.
[15]F. Liang, X. Peng and J. Xu, "A light weight HEVC Encoder for
Image Coding"
MSRA-MOE joint key lab, Univ. of Sci and
Technology of China, Hefei China
[16] J. Bankoski, P. Wilkins and Xu Yaowu "Technical Overview of
VP8,an open source video codec for the web", International conference on
Multimedia and Expo 2011,pages:1-6
[17] T. Nguyen and D. Marpe, "Objective Performance Evaluation of the
HEVC Main Still Picture Profile" IEEE Transactions on circuits and
systems for video technology ,15 September 2014 page:1
[18] “The WebM Project.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.webmproject.org/
[19] “WebP Google Developers.” [Online]. Available: http://code.google.
com/speed/webp/
[20] “Kodak Lossless True Color Image Suite.” [Online]. Available:
http://r0k.us/graphics/kodak/
[21]P.K. Bansal, M.N. Shukla and A.S. Motra, "VP8 Encoder-Cost
effective implementation", SoftCOM,2012 pages(1-6)











[22] Z. Xiong et.al, “A comparative study of DCT- and wavelet-based image
coding,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Tech., vol.9, pp.
692-695, Aug. 1999.
[23] Visual studio download for students for free- www.dreamspark.com
[24] Tortoise SVN download- http://tortoisesvn.net/downloads.html
[25]MPL Websitehttp://www.uta.edu/faculty/krrao/dip/Courses/EE5359/index_tem.html
[26] K.R. Rao, D.N. Kim and J.J. Hwang, “Video Coding Standards: AVS
China, H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10, HEVC, VP6, DIRAC and VC-1”, Springer,
2014.
[27] http://www.imagemagick.org/script/install-source.php : program for
converting to YUV format.
[28] V. Sze ,M. Budagavi and G. J. Sullivan (Editors), "High Efficiency Video
Coding (HEVC): Algorithms and Architectures," Springer,2014
[29] Iain Richardson/Vcodex.com “HEVC An Introduction to High Efficiency
Video Coding” 2013
[30] Iain Richardson, “Video Codec Design: Developing Image and Video
Compression Systems”, Wiley, 2002.
[31]http://www.imageprocessingplace.com/root_files_V3/
image_databases.htm
[32]http://cloudinary.com/blog/animated_webp_how_to_convert_animated_gif_
to_webp_and_save_up_to_90_bandwidth