Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of Doubling the Size of Image Algorithms

  • Published:
Automatic Control and Computer Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper the comparative analysis for quality of some interpolation non-adaptive methods of doubling the image size is carried out. We used the value of a mean square error for estimation accuracy (quality) approximation. Artifacts (aliasing, Gibbs effect (ringing), blurring, etc.) introduced by interpolation methods were not considered. The description of the doubling interpolation upscale algorithms are presented, such as: the nearest neighbor method, linear and cubic interpolation, Lanczos convolution interpolation (with a = 1, 2, 3), and 17-point interpolation method. For each method of upscaling to twice optimal coefficients of kernel convolutions for different down-scale to twice algorithms were found. Various methods for reducing the image size by half were considered the mean value over 4 nearest points and the weighted value of 16 nearest points with optimal coefficients. The optimal weights were calculated for each method of doubling described in this paper. The optimal weights were chosen in such a way as to minimize the value of mean square error between the accurate value and the found approximation. A simple method performing correction for approximation of any algorithm of doubling size is offered. The proposed correction method shows good results for simple interpolation algorithms. However, these improvements are insignificant for complex algorithms (17-point interpolation, Lanczos a = 3). According to the results of numerical experiments, the most accurate among the reviewed algorithms is the 17-point interpolation method, slightly worse is Lanczos convolution interpolation with the parameter a = 3 (see Table 2).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Vatolin, D., et al., Metody szhatiya dannykh. Ustroistvo arkhivatorov, szhatie izobrazhenii i video (Data Compression Methods. The Structure of Archivers, Compression of Images and Videos), Moscow: Dialog–MIFI, 2002.

  2. Gonzalez, R.C. and Woods, R.E., Digital Image Processing, Prentice Hall, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Pratt, W.K., Digital Image Processing, Wiley, 1978.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Khashin, S.I., 17-point interpolation formula of two variables, Vestn. Ivanov. Gos. Univ., 2003, no. 3, pp. 133–137.

  5. Jahne, B., Digital Image Processing, Springer, 2005.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Burger, W. and Burge, M.J., Principles of Digital Image Processing: Core Algorithms, London: Springer-Verlag, 2009.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Taubman, D.S. and Marcellin, M.W., JPEG2000: Image Compression Fundamentals, Standards, and Practice, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2002.

  8. Wallace, G.K., The JPEG still picture compression standard, IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron., 1992, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. xviii–xxxiv.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Keys, R.G., Cubic convolution interpolation for digital image, Proc. IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process., 1981, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1153–1160.

  10. Klette, R., Concise Computer Vision. An Introduction into Theory and Algorithms, London: Springer-Verlag, 2014.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Xin, Li and Orchard, M.T., New edge-directed interpolation, IEEE Trans. Image Process., 2001, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1521–1527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Federal targeted Program “Scientific and Scientific-pedagogical Personnel of Innovative Russia” under the grant no. 162 (2014/40).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to S. E. Vaganov or S. I. Khashin.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vaganov, S.E., Khashin, S.I. Comparison of Doubling the Size of Image Algorithms. Aut. Control Comp. Sci. 53, 779–786 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0146411619070228

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3103/S0146411619070228

Keywords:

Navigation