Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

image/jpeg: wrong decoding of a sRGB image #14522

shepik opened this issue Feb 26, 2016 · 5 comments

image/jpeg: wrong decoding of a sRGB image #14522

shepik opened this issue Feb 26, 2016 · 5 comments


Copy link

shepik commented Feb 26, 2016

Q1. go version go1.6 linux/amd64

GOGCCFLAGS="-fPIC -m64 -pthread -fmessage-length=0"

Q3. Decoding and re-encoding image produces wrong image.
Steps to reproduce:
a. wget -O test.jpg
b. go run file.go
c. open test.jpg and out.jpg in any image viewer

package main

import (

func main() {
    reader, err := os.Open("test.jpg")
    defer reader.Close()
    m, _, err := image.Decode(reader)
    if err != nil {

    buf := new(bytes.Buffer)
    jpeg.Encode(buf, m, &jpeg.Options{Quality: 85})
    ioutil.WriteFile("out.jpg", buf.Bytes(), 0644)

Q4. I expected to see image visually similar to original

Q5. I got image visually different from the original.



@minux minux changed the title image/jpeg - image/jpeg: wrong decoding of a sRGB image Feb 26, 2016
@minux minux added this to the Go1.7 milestone Feb 26, 2016
Copy link

minux commented Feb 26, 2016 via email

Copy link

What did you use to make this JPEG? Next to nothing opens it properly; only libjpeg and MS's jpeg decoder seem to work, all other libs + photoshop seem to fail. FFmpeg outputs the same broken image.

Copy link

shepik commented Feb 26, 2016

I got it via api. Here it is in the web:

I believe vk is not to blame either, because most of photos are fine. I've seen a couple of photos from multiple sources broken that way, so it's not an isolated problem.

Copy link

This is a progressive JPEG image. There are two dimensions of progressivity: spectral selection (variables zs and ze in scan.go, ranging in [0, 63]) and successive approximation (variables ah and al in scan.go, ranging in [0, 8), from LSB to MSB, although ah=0 implicitly means ah=8).

For this particular image, there are three components, and the SOS markers contain this progression:

zs, ze, ah, al: 0 0 0 0 components: 0, 1, 2
zs, ze, ah, al: 1 63 0 0 components: 1
zs, ze, ah, al: 1 63 0 0 components: 2
zs, ze, ah, al: 1 63 0 2 components: 0
zs, ze, ah, al: 1 10 2 1 components: 0
zs, ze, ah, al: 11 63 2 1 components: 0
zs, ze, ah, al: 1 10 1 0 components: 0

The combination of all of these is complete (i.e. spectra 0 to 63 and bits 8 exclusive to 0) for components 1 and 2, but it is incomplete for component 0 (the luma component). In particular, there is no data for component 0, spectra 11 to 63 and bits 1 exclusive to 0.

The image/jpeg code, as of Go 1.6, waits until both dimensions are complete before performing the de-quantization, IDCT and copy to an *image.YCbCr. This is the "if zigEnd != blockSize-1 || al != 0 { ... continue }" code and associated commentary in scan.go.

Almost all progressive JPEG images end up complete in both dimensions for all components, but this particular image is incomplete for component 0, so the Go code never writes anything to the Y values of the resultant *image.YCbCr, which is why the broken output is so dark (but still looks recognizable in terms of red and blue hues).

My reading of the ITU T.81 JPEG specification (Annex G) doesn't explicitly say that this is a valid image, but it also doesn't rule it out.

In any case, the fix is, for progressive JPEG images, to always reconstruct the decoded blocks (by performing the de-quantization, IDCT and copy to an *image.YCbCr), regardless of whether or not they end up complete. Note that, in Go, the jpeg.Decode function does not return until the entire image is decoded, so we still only want to reconstruct each block once, not once per SOS (Start Of Scan) marker.

Copy link

CL mentions this issue.

@golang golang locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 31, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
None yet

No branches or pull requests

5 participants