[comp.compression] Hadamard Transform in image compression

sc7@ukc.ac.uk (S.Chan) (06/21/91)

I have come across some early papers on using Hadamard Transform for
image compression due to the smaller amount of computations required
as compared to DFT and DCT. However the DCT has emerged as the popular
choice. Can someone point out to me what are the demerits of the
Hadamard transform in the application of image compression? References
are welcome. Thanks.

Chan Syin

edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) (06/25/91)

In article <7832@harrier.ukc.ac.uk> sc7@ukc.ac.uk (S.Chan) writes:
>I have come across some early papers on using Hadamard Transform for
>image compression due to the smaller amount of computations required
>as compared to DFT and DCT. However the DCT has emerged as the popular
>choice. Can someone point out to me what are the demerits of the
>Hadamard transform in the application of image compression? References
>are welcome. Thanks.

The Hadamard transform (perhaps better called the Walsh-Hadamard
transform) has basis vectors in which all values are either 1 or -1.  This
makes it very easy to implement; no multiplication is necessary (except
for final scaling--and a shift usually can take care of that).  But its
energy compression and decorrelation efficiencies are inferior to the
discrete cosine transform (DCT).  Given that DSP technology and fast DCT
algoritms have reached the point where practical DCT coders can be
implemented even at high data rates, interest in inferior transforms has
slacked off.

DCT compression is hardly the end of the line, though.  Despite near-
optimum performance in terms of compressing image blocks into few
coefficients, there is a tendency toward "blockiness" in DCT systems as
compression ratios are raised. (Such block-boundry artifacts are even more
of a problem in Walsh-Hadamard systems.) Other transforms--wavelet
transforms, for instance--tend not to have this problem, yielding a
visually more pleasing result for a given degree of error.  In addition,
such systems often can lend themselves to progressive transmission--where
detail is built up over the entire image over time--whereas DCT-based
systems generally cannot.  (Neither of these objections are absolute,
and partial solutions exist.)

To a certain extent, appropriate quantization and efficient coding
of coefficients are more important than transform choice.  A lot of
recent research has been into these areas.

		-Ed Hall
		edhall@rand.org