1. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Villanova University 18 August 2004 Robert J. Berger II Michael P. Marcinak Bijan G. Mobasseri Michael Marcinak

2. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work JPEG Watermarking Software Current Version Enhancements Additional Components Video Applications Error resiliency MPEG 1|2|4, H.263, H.264 Overview Michael Marcinak

3. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Goals: Produce a standalone package Incorporate visual masking Improve speed and efficiency Maximize capacity JPEG Watermarking Software Michael Marcinak

4. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Current Version: Encoder Michael Marcinak

5. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Final Version: Encoder Michael Marcinak

6. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Watermarking maps used VLC’s to unused VLC’s with different run/size Run/size information of unused VLC’s must be modified in the Huffman table Visual Masking Michael Marcinak

7. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Three scenarios of visual masking: watermarked VLC is longer than original watermarked VLC is shorter than original watermarked and original are the same length Visual Masking Michael Marcinak

8. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Broaden scope from “lenaG.jpg” Grayscale and color images Potentially reduce file size Remove zero padds (0xff00) by watermarking 1’s to 0’s Enhancements Michael Marcinak

9. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Maximize Capacity Adapt binary tree to JPEG Include run/size info Intelligently select which bit to watermark Improved Security Additional Components Michael Marcinak

10. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Goals: Apply watermark algorithm to video Video Applications Michael Marcinak

11. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Real-time Lossless Preserved filesize Format compliant Video Applications Michael Marcinak

12. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Unlike JPEG, VLC tables may not be complete Video VLC Codespace Michael Marcinak

13. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Problem: By introducing a watermark into the bitstream, an unaware decoder may interpret bit errors Solution: Exploit error resiliency of various standards Watermarking Video Michael Marcinak

14. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Error propagation Error concealment (decoder) Error-resilient coding (encoder) Error resilient techniques in current standards Error Resiliency Michael Marcinak

15. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Bit errors usually result in loss of information between resynchronization markers Error Propagation Michael Marcinak

16. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Way of covering up corrupted data Three types: Spatial Interpolation - pixel blocks Temporal Interpolation - motion vectors Motion Compensated Temporal Prediction Error Concealment Michael Marcinak

17. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Inserting Resynchronization Markers Data Partitioning Reversible Variable Length Codes (RVLC) Error-resilient Coding Michael Marcinak

18. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Properties: Uniquely distinguishable from other codewords Intelligent placement - frames, slices, GOB Usually long length Enables decoder to regain synchronization Reduces coding efficiency Michael Marcinak Inserting Resync Markers

19. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Partition MB header, motion vectors, and DCT information separately Limits error propagation Separate watermarking MV and DCT information Michael Marcinak Data Partitioning

20. RVLC’s are uniquely decodable both forwards and backwards Longer than regular VLC’s Recovers more data Reduces compression efficiency Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Michael Marcinak Reversible Variable Length Codes

21. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work MPEG 1/2 (MPEG 1991/1994) H.263 (VCEG 1998) MPEG 4 - Part 2 (MPEG 1999) H.264 (Advanced Video Coding) (JVT 2001) Michael Marcinak Video Standards

22. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work Michael Marcinak Comparison Resync Markers Data Partitioning RVLC MPEG 1/2yesnoyes H.263yes MPEG 4yes H.264yes no

23. Watermarking Part 2: Future Work 1. G. Cote, F. Kossentini, S. Wenger, “Error resilience Coding” in M. T. Sun, and A. Reibman, “Compressed Video over Networks” Marcel Dekker, 2000. 2. B. Girod, “Error-resilient Video”, Image, Video, and Multimedia Systems Group. 3. Li and Drew, “Fundamentals of Multimedia”, Prentice Hall, 2003. 4. D. P. K. Lun, “Error Resilient Coding Techniques”, Internet Technology for Multimedia Applications, 2002. 5. Y. Wang, S. Wenger, J. Wen, and A. Katsaggelos, “Review of Error Resilient Coding Techniques for Real-Time Video Communications”, Signal Processing Magazine. 6. S. Wenger et. al., “Error Resilience Support in H.263+”, IEEE Trans. CSVT 1998. 7. The International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee, “Information Technology - Digital Compression and Coding of Continuous-Tone Still Images - Requirements and Guidelines”. CCITT Recommendation T.81, September 1992. 8. Telecommunication Standardization Sector of ITU, “Video coding for low bit rate communication”. ITU-T Recommendation H.263, February 1998. References Michael Marcinak