Post-processing coding artefacts for JPEG documents

  • The-Anh PhamEmail author
  • Mathieu Delalandre
Original Paper


Coding artefacts, including ringing and blocking artefacts, are often introduced when document images are compressed using the JPEG standard. These artefacts severely impact visual perception of the image content. Although a number of methods have been presented to deal with coding artefacts, most of them are dedicated to natural images; few works have investigated to work on document content. The current work is an attempt to fill this lack. In contrast to all the approaches taken by previous works, we propose to post-process the coding artefacts by estimating the quantization noise, which is not available on the decoder’s side. The estimated noise is then used to reconstruct the image with better quality. A number of experiments were conducted to show the efficiency of the proposed method in comparison with the state-of-the-art methods.


Compression artefacts Artefact post-processing Document decompression 


  1. 1.
    Aharon, M., Elad, M., Bruckstein, A.: The K-SVD: an algorithm for designing of overcomplete dictionaries for sparse representation. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 54(11), 4311–4322 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alaei, A., Delalandre, M., Girard, N.: Logo detection using painting based representation and probability features. In: International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR 2013), pp. 1235–1239 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aung, A., Ng, B.P., Shwe, C.T.: A new transform for document image compression. In: 2009 7th International Conference on Information, Communications and Signal Processing (ICICS), pp. 1–5 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bottou, L., Haffner, P., Howard, P.G., Simard, P., Bengio, Y., LeCun, Y.: High quality document image compression with ’DjVu’. J. Electron. Imaging 7(3), 410–425 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brandão, T., Queluz, M.P.: No-reference image quality assessment based on DCT domain statistics. Signal Process. 88(4), 822–833 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bredies, K., Holler, M.: A total variation-based JPEG decompression model. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 5(1), 366–393 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bredies, K., Kunisch, K., Pock, T.: Total generalized variation. SIAM J. Imaging Sci. 3(3), 492–526 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chambolle, A.: An algorithm for total variation minimization and applications. J. Math. Imaging Vis. 20(1–2), 89–97 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang, H., Ng, M., Zeng, T.: Reducing artifact in JPEG decompression via a learned dictionary. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 62(3), 718–728 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Darwiche, M., Pham, T.A., Delalandre, M.: Comparison of JPEG’s competitors for document images. In: 2015 International Conference on Image Processing Theory, Tools and Applications (IPTA 2015), pp. 487–493 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Queiroz, R.: Processing JPEG-compressed images and documents. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 8(12), 1661–1672 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Franca Pereira e Silva, G., Lins, R.D.: Assessing the OCR degradation in the generation of JPEG, PNG, and TIFF files from Adobe PDF. In: ITS 2010 IEEE-SBrT International Telecommunications Symposium (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Elad, M., Aharon, M.: Image denoising via sparse and redundant representations over learned dictionaries. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 15(12), 3736–3745 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jung, C., Jiao, L., Qi, H., Sun, T.: Image deblocking via sparse representation. Signal Process. Image Commun. 27(6), 663–677 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kartalov, T., Ivanovski, Z., Panovski, L., Karam, L.: An adaptive POCS algorithm for compression artifacts removal. In: 9th International Symposium on Signal Processing and Its Applications, 2007. ISSPA 2007, pp. 1–4 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lam, E.Y.: Compound document compression with model-based biased reconstruction. J. Electron. Imaging 13(1), 191–197 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Otsu, N.: A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 9(1), 62–66 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oztan, B., Malik, A., Fan, Z., Eschbach, R.: Removal of artifacts from JPEG compressed document images. In: Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, vol. 6493, pp. 1–9 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pati, Y.C., Rezaiifar, R., Krishnaprasad, P.S.: Orthogonal matching pursuit: Recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition. In: Conference Record of the 27th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, vol. 1, pp. 40–44 (1993)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pham, T.A., Delalandre, M.: Effective decompression of JPEG document images. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 25(6), 3655–3670 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Prost, R., Ding, Y., Baskurt, A.: JPEG dequantization array for regularized decompression. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 6(6), 883–888 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Samadani, R.: Characterizing and estimating block DCT image compression quantization parameters, pp. 1230–1234 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Samadani, R., Sundararajan, A., Said, A.: Deringing and deblocking DCT compression artifacts with efficient shifted transforms, pp. 1799–1802 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Saraswat, N., Ghosh, H.: A study on size optimization of scanned textual documents. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 9431, 75–86 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Savakis, A.E.: Evaluation of lossless compression methods for gray scale document images. In: Proceedings 2000 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No. 00CH37101), vol. 1, pp. 136–139 (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wallace, G.K.: The JPEG still picture compression standard. Commun. ACM 34(4), 30–44 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R., Simoncelli, E.P.: Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 13(4), 600–612 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wong, T., Bouman, C., Pollak, I., Fan, Z.: A document image model and estimation algorithm for optimized JPEG decompression. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 18(11), 2518–2535 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yang, S., Hu, Y.H., Tull, D.: Blocking effect removal using robust statistics and line process. In: 1999 IEEE 3rd Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing, pp. 315–320 (1999)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yang, Y., Galatsanos, N., Katsaggelos, A.: Projection-based spatially adaptive reconstruction of block-transform compressed images. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 4(7), 896–908 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, P., Wang, S., Wang, R.: Reducing frequency-domain artifacts of binary image due to coarse sampling by repeated interpolation and smoothing of radon projections. J. Visual Commun. Image Represent. 23, 697–704 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang, X., Xiong, R., Fan, X., Ma, S., Gao, W.: Compression artifact reduction by overlapped-block transform coefficient estimation with block similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 22(12), 4613–4626 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zou, J.J., Yan, H.: A deblocking method for BDCT compressed images based on adaptive projections. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. 15(3), 430–435 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hong Duc UniversityThanh Hoa CityVietnam
  2. 2.Computer Science LabToursFrance

Personalised recommendations