Book a demo

Onboard Image Processing Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026

Onboard Image Processing Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/onboard-image-processing-and-data-compression-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Remote Sensing Payload
Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression Patents
  • 30.4% concentration at the top. The five most-active assignees hold 268 of the 883 records in scope — a leader at 97 filings with a long tail behind it.
  • Filing activity is still climbing. From 2021 to 2024, filings rose from 14 to 22 across the leading assignee's output — a 57% increase over that three-year span.
  • H04N dominates, G06V and G10L barely register. 70.1% of records touch pictorial communication coding, but image/video recognition (4.8%) and speech/audio (2.6%) are thin by comparison.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
883
Published Records
30%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+57%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (14 records) with 2024 (22) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 883 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

Onboard image processing and data compression sits at the intersection of payload engineering and coding theory: satellites, drones and edge cameras that must compress imagery before it reaches a downlink or storage bus. The search scope spans 883 published records from 2015 through mid-2026, combining terms for onboard compression and processing with the specific coding mechanisms — wavelet transforms, rate-distortion optimisation, bit-error resilience — that separate a patentable technique from a generic pipeline description. Patent families, not raw document counts, are the fairer comparison unit here, since continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplicates can otherwise inflate a single invention’s footprint.

The data points to a field still anchored by decades-old coding fundamentals — the most-cited records date to the mid-1990s — while filing volume has kept growing into the 2020s. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the final one or two years in any chart will look thinner than the underlying filing activity actually was.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2017-2026
  1. 1RICOH CO LTD97
  2. 2MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC89
  3. 3EDGY BEES LTD29
  4. 4SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD28
  5. 5RGB SYSTEMS INC25
  6. 6TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL)25
  7. 7HUAWEI TECH CO LTD24
  8. 8SONY INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT LLC23
  9. 9XEROX CORP22
  10. 10RICHO CORP(US)15
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology

Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.

10,000 free credits to start
The Data

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 883 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.

Filing trend, 2017-2026

Filings rose from 21 in 2017 to a peak of 44 in 2019, before settling into a lower but still-active band; the leading assignee's own filings grew from 14 in 2021 to 22 in 2024, a 57% increase over that span. The final years in the chart are undercounted because of publication lag, not falling demand.

Filing trend, 2017-2026013253850212017201844201920202021202220232024202512026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC subclass composition

H04N (pictorial communication) covers 70.1% of the 883 records, with G06T (image data processing, 38.2%) and H03M (coding and code conversion, 25.1%) as the next-heaviest subclasses. G06V (image/video recognition, 4.8%) and G10L/H04L (each 2.6%) are comparatively open — a record can carry several classes, so these shares add to more than 100%.

IPC subclass compositionH04N · Pictorial communication (video…61970.1%G06T · Image data processing & genera…33738.2%H03M · Coding & code conversion22225.1%G06K · Data recognition & presentation19422.0%G06F · Electric digital data processi…13815.6%G06V · Image/video recognition424.8%G10L · Speech & audio analysis/synthe…232.6%H04L · Digital information transmissi…232.6%Other16919.1%

Shares are the percentage of the 883 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about onboard image processing and data compression and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Prior Art

Key patents shaping the field

Representative Filing
US6757343B12004-06-29

Discrete wavelet transform system architecture design using filterbank factorization

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, UNIVERSITY OF

Techniques to overlap states for efficient multilevel wavelet decompositions to reduce memory and delay in discrete wavelet transform in a block-by-block fashion. The input data is segmented into blocks and each block is processed separately, either sequentially or in parallel. Results of partially completed computations in each block is saved and used to complete computations in an adjacent block.Filed by the University of Southern California; granted 2004-06-29 as US6757343B1.

US6757343B1 — patent drawing 1US6757343B1 — patent drawing 2
View full record
Most-cited records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US5253078ASystem for compression and decompression of video data using discrete cosine transform and coding techniques318
2US5867602AReversible wavelet transform and embedded codestream manipulation296
3US5748786AApparatus for compression using reversible embedded wavelets278
4US5850482AError resilient method and apparatus for entropy coding272
5US5764374ASystem and method for lossless image compression having improved sequential determination of golomb parameter254
6US20030214502A1Apparatus and method for depth image-based representation of 3-dimensional object251
7US6011905AUsing fontless structured document image representations to render displayed and printed documents at preferr…250
8US5966465ACompression/decompression using reversible embedded wavelets233
9US6195465B1Method and apparatus for compression using reversible wavelet transforms and an embedded codestream232
10US20150371431A1Methods for analyzing and compressing multiple images209

Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus — read them as a signal of influence on the field's vocabulary, not as a ranking of current relevance.

Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis

 
Where to run it
Fastest

Eureka on the web

When you want the answer in the next five minutes.

The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.

Run your analysis now →
For builders

MCP server & REST API

When it has to run inside your own pipeline.

Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.

Browse MCP servers →
Insights

What the numbers mean for a filing decision

Three patterns in the data matter more than the raw counts on their own.

Concentration
30.4%
held by top 5 of 883 records

A leader with room behind it

The leading assignee holds 97 filings against a fifth-place figure of 25 and a tenth-place figure of 15 — concentration at the very top, but the drop-off after the leader is steep enough that the middle of the ranking is contestable rather than locked up.

Based on the 100-company ranked assignee list.
Growth
+57%
2021 to 2024, leading assignee

Momentum is real, not historical residue

The +57% rise from 14 to 22 filings between 2021 and 2024 sits inside the window the dataset can treat as complete, which means recent filing pressure is genuine rather than an artefact of older peaks like 2019's 44.

2025-2026 figures are still filling in due to publication lag.
Coding fundamentals
318 citations
US5253078A, DCT-based compression

The prior art anchor is decades old

The most-cited record in scope describes DCT-based video compression from the early 1990s; wavelet and entropy-coding patents from the same era round out the top five most-cited records, meaning any new filing in core transform coding is arguing against thirty-year-old foundational claims.

Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older records.
Composition skew
4.8%
G06V share of 883 records

Recognition and audio are thin

Image/video recognition (G06V) and speech/audio analysis (G10L) each cover under 5% of records despite onboard systems increasingly needing both — a gap between what payloads are starting to do and what the filed claim space actually protects.

Shares sum above 100% because records carry multiple IPC classes.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to onboard image processing and data compression, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players

Who is filing, and where the gate sits

The ranked list of 100 companies shows a familiar shape: one clear leader, a mid-tier of consumer electronics and telecom names, and a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants.

Leader
97
records

A single dominant filer

The top assignee's filing count is nearly four times the fifth-place figure of 25, built on a strong internal co-assignee relationship between its Japan and US entities (18 shared filings) — a sign of a coordinated global filing strategy rather than opportunistic single filings.

Recent-year momentum for this assignee shows 0 filings in the latest year, consistent with publication lag rather than a pullback.
Mid-tier
25 to 15
records, 5th to 10th place

Consumer electronics and telecom crowd the middle

Names spanning smartphone makers, network infrastructure vendors and imaging specialists occupy the 5th-to-10th band, together accounting for 42.7% of all 883 records when combined with the top five — this is where competitive filing pressure is most direct.

Top 10 combined: 377 filings across 883 records in scope.
Long tail
883
total records

Many single-purpose entrants

Below the ranked leaders sits a long tail of universities, defence contractors and smaller imaging firms filing narrowly on specific compression mechanisms — exactly where the University of Southern California's wavelet architecture patent sits, a single influential filing rather than part of a filing programme.

883 total published records define the full scope.
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth a freedom-to-operate check
Sub-areas where IPC composition data suggests claim density is thin relative to where onboard systems are heading.
Onboard cloud/obscurant detectionJoint recognition-compression pipelinesBit-error-resilient entropy coding for lossy linksAudio/telemetry co-compression with imageryAdaptive rate-distortion for variable-bandwidth downlinks
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Ricoh Co., Ltd.0
Microsoft Corporation0
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC0
EDGY BEES LTD0
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.0
Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC0
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ)0
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next

Where to take this next

The landscape points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is defensive clearance or offensive filing.

Run a freedom-to-operate check on the gate chips

The under-claimed sub-areas identified from IPC composition are a starting point, not a conclusion — each needs a targeted search against the specific claim language of records in that subclass before a filing decision is made.

Check freedom to operate in Eureka

Map the co-assignee network before approaching a partner

The strongest co-assignee pair in this dataset reflects a coordinated multi-entity filing strategy; understanding who files jointly with whom clarifies where a licensing or partnership conversation is likely to land.

Explore assignee networks in Eureka

Track the leading assignee's next filing wave

With momentum data showing 0 filings in the latest year across several major assignees, the honest read is publication lag rather than a slowdown — worth revisiting this trend once the 2025-2026 window fills in.

Set up filing alerts in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions on this landscape

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Onboard Image Processing and Data Compression in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole onboard image processing and data compression corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.

Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.

Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.

Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.