I've implemented an image/video transformation technique called discrete cosine transform. This technique is used in MPEG video encoding. I based my algorithm on the ideas presented at the following URL:
http://vsr.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de/~jan/MPEG/HTML/mpeg_tech.html
Now I can transform an 8x8 section of a black and white image, such as:
0140 0124 0124 0132 0130 0139 0102 0088 0140 0123 0126 0132 0134 0134 0088 0117 0143 0126 0126 0133 0134 0138 0081 0082 0148 0126 0128 0136 0137 0134 0079 0130 0147 0128 0126 0137 0138 0145 0132 0144 0147 0131 0123 0138 0137 0140 0145 0137 0142 0135 0122 0137 0140 0138 0143 0112 0140 0138 0125 0137 0140 0140 0148 0143
Into this an image with all the important information at the top right. The transformed block looks like this:
1041 0039 -023 0044 0027 0000 0021 -019 -050 0044 -029 0000 0009 -014 0032 -010 0000 0000 0000 0000 -018 0010 -017 0000 0014 -019 0010 0000 0000 0016 -012 0000 0010 -010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 -016 0021 -014 0010 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 -010 0013 -014 0010 0000 0000
Now, I need to know how can I take advantage of this transformation? I'd like to detect other 8x8 blocks in the same image ( or another image ) that represent a good match.
Also, What does this transformation give me? Why is the information stored in the top right of the converted image important?
The result of a DCT is a transformation of the original source into the frequency domain. The top left entry stores the "amplitude" the "base" frequency and frequency increases both along the horizontal and vertical axes. The outcome of the DCT is usually a collection of amplitudes at the more usual lower frequencies (the top left quadrant) and less entries at the higher frequencies. As lassevk mentioned, it is usual to just zero out these higher frequencies as they typically constitute very minor parts of the source. However, this does result in loss of information. To complete the compression it is usual to use a lossless compression over the DCT'd source. This is where the compression comes in as all those runs of zeros get packed down to almost nothing.
One possible advantage of using the DCT to find similar regions is that you can do a first pass match on low frequency values (top-left corner). This reduces the number of values you need to match against. If you find matches of low frequency values, you can increase into comparing the higher frequencies.
Hope this helps
I learned everything I know about the DCT from The Data Compression Book. In addition to being a great introduction to the field of data compression, it has a chapter near the end on lossy image compression which introduces JPEG and the DCT.
The concepts underlying these kinds of transformations are more easily seen by first looking at a one dimensional case. The image here shows a square wave along with several of the first terms of an infinite series. Looking at it, note that if the functions for the terms are added together, they begin to approximate the shape of the square wave. The more terms you add up, the better the approximation. But, to get from an approximation to the exact signal, you have to sum an infinite number of terms. The reason for this is that the square wave is discontinuous. If you think of a square wave as a function of time, it goes from -1 to 1 in zero time. To represent such a thing requires an infinite series. Take another look at the plot of the series terms. The first is red, the second yellow. Successive terms have more "up and down" transitions. These are from the increasing frequency of each term. Sticking with the square wave as a function of time, and each series term a function of frequency there are two equivalent representations: a function of time and a function of frequency (1/time).
In the real world, there are no square waves. Nothing happens in zero time. Audio signals, for example occupy the range 20Hz to 20KHz, where Hz is 1/time. Such things can be represented with finite series'.
For images, the mathematics are the same, but two things are different. First, it's two dimensional. Second the notion of time makes no sense. In the 1D sense, the square wave is merely a function that gives some numerical value for for an argument that we said was time. An (static) image is a function that gives a numerical value for for every pair of row, column indeces. In other words, the image is a function of a 2D space, that being a rectangular region. A function like that can be represented in terms of its spatial frequency. To understand what spatial frequency is, consider an 8 bit grey level image and a pair of adjacent pixels. The most abrupt transistion that can occur in the image is going from 0 (say black) to 255 (say white) over the distance of 1 pixel. This corresponds directly with the highest frequency (last) term of a series representation.
A two dimensional Fourier (or Cosine) transformation of the image results in an array of values the same size as the image, representing the same information not as a function of space, but a function of 1/space. The information is ordered from lowest to highest frequency along the diagonal from the origin highest row and column indeces. An example is here.
For image compression, you can transform an image, discard some number of higher frequency terms and inverse transform the remaining ones back to an image, which has less detail than the original. Although it transforms back to an image of the same size (with the removed terms replaced by zero), in the frequency domain, it occupies less space.
Another way to look at it is reducing an image to a smaller size. If, for example you try to reduce the size of an image by throwing away three of every four pixels in a row, and three of every four rows, you'll have an array 1/4 the size but the image will look terrible. In most cases, this is accomplished with a 2D interpolator, which produces new pixels by averaging rectangular groups of the larger image's pixels. In so doing, the interpolation has an effect similar throwing away series terms in the frequency domain, only it's much faster to compute.
To do more things, I'm going to refer to a Fourier transformation as an example. Any good discussion of the topic will illustrate how the Fourier and Cosine transformation are related. The Fourier transformation of an image can't be viewed directly as such, because it's made of complex numbers. It's already segregated into two kinds of information, the Real and Imaginary parts of the numbers. Typically, you'll see images or plots of these. But it's more meaningful (usually) to separate the complex numbers into their magnitude and phase angle. This is simply taking a complex number on the complex plane and switching to polar coordinates.
For the audio signal, think of the combined sin and cosine functions taking an attitional quantity in their arguments to shift the function back and forth (as a part of the signal representation). For an image, the phase information describes how each term of the series is shifted with respect to the other terms in frequency space. In images, edges are (hopefully) so distinct that they are well characterized by lowest frequency terms in the frequency domain. This happens not because they are abrupt transitions, but because they have e.g. a lot of black area adjacent to a lot of lighter area. Consider a one dimensional slice of an edge. The grey level is zero then transitions up and stays there. Visualize the sine wave that woud be the first approximation term where it crosses the signal transition's midpoint at sin(0). The phase angle of this term corresponds to a displacement in the image space. A great illustraion of this is available here. If you are trying to find shapes and can make a reference shape, this is one way to recognize them.
If I remember correctly, this matrix allows you to save the data to a file with compression.
If you read further down, you'll find the zig-zag pattern of data to read from that final matrix. The most important data are in the top left corner, and least important in the bottom right corner. As such, if you stop writing at some point and just consider the rest as 0's, even though they aren't, you'll get a lossy approximation of the image.
The number of values you throw away increases compression at the cost of image fidelity.
But I'm sure someone else can give you a better explanation.
I'd recommend picking up a copy of Digital Video Compression - it's a really good overview of compression algorithms for images and video.
Anthony Cramp's answer looked good to me. As he mentions the DCT transforms the data into the frequency domain. The DCT is heavily used in video compression as the human visual system is must less sensitive to high frequency changes, therefore zeroing out the higher frequency values results in a smaller file, with little effect on a human's perception of the video quality.
In terms of using the DCT to compare images, I guess the only real benefit is if you cut away the higher frequency data and therefore have a smaller set of data to search/match. Something like Harr wavelets may give better image matching results.
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4582/video-compression-what-is-discrete-cosine-transform