Digital Image Watermarking Techniques: A Review Pushpa Mala .S. pushpasiddaraju@gmail.com Research Scholar, Jain University, Bengaluru, India & Sambhram Institute of Technology, Bengaluru, India

D. Jayadevappa devappa.22@gmail.com

Dept. of Electronics & Instrumentation Engineering, JSS Academy of Technical Education, Bengaluru, India

K.Ezhilarasan murali981983@gmail.com Research Scholar, Jain University, Bengaluru, India & Sambhram Institute of Technology, Bengaluru, India

Abstract

Keywords:

1. INTRODUCTION

2. FEATURES OF DIGITAL WATERMARKING SCHEMES

Robustness

Imperceptibility

Security

Verifiability

Computational Cost

Watermark Detection

Capacity

Tradeoff parameters

FIGURE 1:

3. DIGITAL IMAGE WATERMARKING APPROACHES

3.1. Visible and Invisible Watermarking

et.al

3. 2. Private and Public Watermarking

et al.

, was .

et al.

also

3.3. Robust and Fragile Watermarking

N NkA

k l, P Q

et al.

ing scheme

the scheme was

3.4. Blind and Non-blind Watermarking

. Nonblind watermarking schemes access

the host image during the detection phase and are private in nature. et al.

schemes

et al.

et al.

3.5 Spatial and Frequency Domain Watermarking

.

4. FREQUENCY DOMAIN WATERMARKING APPROACHES

prior

amples

waswas

was was

of could be

n N N N N

n et al.

et al.

8 8

* , , , , , ,, ,

, ,

C

u v b u v b u v bu v b

u v b

X t wX

X

, , , ,if

otherwise

cu v b u v b

X t

, ,u v bX *

, ,u v bX

, ,u v bw

, ,cu v b

t

, , , , , , ,*, , ,

, , ,

F

u v l f l f u v l fu v l f

u v l f

X t wX

X

, , , ,if

otherwise

F

u v l f l fX t

, , ,u v l fX ,u v l

f ,*

, , ,u v l fX , , ,u v l fw

,F

l ft l

f

et al. scheme

T

schemeet al.

the watermark

schemescheme

8 8

lc- lc

et al.

lc lc

et al.

et al.

N N

1 2

1 1 1 2 2 2

1 2

1 12 / 2 /

1 2 1 2

0 0

, ( , )N N

j n k N j n k N

n n

I k k i n n e

1 2 1 2( , ) ( , )M k k I k k 1 2( , )P k k

1 2( , )W k k

A N N U V

S W S

WU

WV

WS ‘ A

W

U WS

T

WV

TA U S V

T

W W WS αW U S V

  A T

W WU S V

et al.

et al.

et al.

22 /2

1/22 2

( ) (2 ,

where

xx x e

x x y

22* /2( )

k kk k e

k

, .i j i jP k M x M x

2 (2 . *i i

iM x x A

( )iM x , ( )i jP k

i j

et al.M≥2

l l

al

et al.

et al.

et al.

et al.

.

5. EVALUATING WATERMARKS

5.1. Performance Evaluation Metrics

PSNR

N N

MSE

BER

C

H W

Transform

Adopted

Concept & Details Results & Summary

SS

DCT

DFT

DWT

Multiwavelets

Contourlets

Ridgelets

Curvelets

Shearlets

TABLE 1:

SSIM

p,q

1 2

2 2 2 2

1 2

2 2pqp q

p qp q

c c

c c

p

q

p q respectively

2

p p

2

q

2

pq p q

1c 2c

MSE

MSE =

2

1 1

1( , ) ( , )

p q

i j

N i j W i jpq

p q

( , )N i j

( , )W i j

5.2. Watermarking Attacks et al.

1) Compression Attacks

2) Interference Attacks

3) Signal Processing Attacks

4) Geometric Attacks

5) Cryptographic Attacks-

6) Collusion Attacks-

7) Active Attacks –

8) Passive Attacks

9) Histogram Equalization attacks

Attack No Attack Median

Filtering

Salt and

Pepper

Noise

Gaussian

Filter

PSNR

TABLE 2:

6. CONCLUSION

7. REFERENCES