[Comparison of film-screen combinations with contrast detail diagram and interactive image analysis. 2: Linear assessment of grey scale ranges with interactive image analysis].

Aktuelle Radiologie Pub Date : 1997-09-01
G Stamm, G Eichbaum, G Hagemann
{"title":"[Comparison of film-screen combinations with contrast detail diagram and interactive image analysis. 2: Linear assessment of grey scale ranges with interactive image analysis].","authors":"G Stamm,&nbsp;G Eichbaum,&nbsp;G Hagemann","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The following three screen-film combinations were compared: a) a combination of anticrossover film and UV-light emitting screens, b) a combination of blue-light emitting screens and film, and c) a conventional green fluorescing screen-film combination. Radiographs of a specially designed plexiglass phantom (0.2 x 0.2 x 0.12 m3) with bar patterns of lead and plaster and of air, respectively were obtained using the following parameters: 12 pulse generator, 0.6 mm focus size, 4.7 mm aluminum pre-filter, a grid with 40 lines/cm (12:1) and a focus-detector distance of 1.15 m. Image analysis was performed using an IBAS system and a Zeiss Kontron computer. Display conditions were the following: display distance 0.12 m, a vario film objective 35/70 (Zeiss), a video camera tube with a PbO photocathode, 625 lines (Siemens Heimann), an IBAS image matrix of 512 x 512 pixels with a resolution of 7 lines/mm, the projected matrix area was 5000 microns2. Grey scale ranges were measured on a line perpendicular to the grouped bar patterns. The difference between the maximum and minimum density value served as signal. The spatial resolution of the detector system was measured when the signal value was three times higher than the standard deviation of the means of multiple density measurements. The results showed considerable advantages of the two new screen-film combinations as compared to the conventional screen-film combination. The result was contradictory to the findings with pure visual assessment of thresholds (part I) that had found no differences. The authors concluded that (automatic) interactive image analysis algorithms serve as an objective measure and are specifically advantageous when small differences in image quality are to be evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":76986,"journal":{"name":"Aktuelle Radiologie","volume":"7 5","pages":"284-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aktuelle Radiologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The following three screen-film combinations were compared: a) a combination of anticrossover film and UV-light emitting screens, b) a combination of blue-light emitting screens and film, and c) a conventional green fluorescing screen-film combination. Radiographs of a specially designed plexiglass phantom (0.2 x 0.2 x 0.12 m3) with bar patterns of lead and plaster and of air, respectively were obtained using the following parameters: 12 pulse generator, 0.6 mm focus size, 4.7 mm aluminum pre-filter, a grid with 40 lines/cm (12:1) and a focus-detector distance of 1.15 m. Image analysis was performed using an IBAS system and a Zeiss Kontron computer. Display conditions were the following: display distance 0.12 m, a vario film objective 35/70 (Zeiss), a video camera tube with a PbO photocathode, 625 lines (Siemens Heimann), an IBAS image matrix of 512 x 512 pixels with a resolution of 7 lines/mm, the projected matrix area was 5000 microns2. Grey scale ranges were measured on a line perpendicular to the grouped bar patterns. The difference between the maximum and minimum density value served as signal. The spatial resolution of the detector system was measured when the signal value was three times higher than the standard deviation of the means of multiple density measurements. The results showed considerable advantages of the two new screen-film combinations as compared to the conventional screen-film combination. The result was contradictory to the findings with pure visual assessment of thresholds (part I) that had found no differences. The authors concluded that (automatic) interactive image analysis algorithms serve as an objective measure and are specifically advantageous when small differences in image quality are to be evaluated.

[对比细节图与交互图像分析的电影-屏幕组合对比。]2 .基于交互式图像分析的灰度范围线性评估[j]。
对以下三种屏膜组合进行了比较:a)防交叉膜与紫外线发光屏的组合,b)蓝光发光屏与薄膜的组合,以及c)常规绿色荧光屏膜组合。采用以下参数获得了特殊设计的有机玻璃幻影(0.2 x 0.2 x 0.12 m3)的x射线照片:12脉冲发生器,0.6 mm焦点尺寸,4.7 mm铝预滤波器,40线/cm(12:1)的栅格,焦点检测器距离为1.15 m。图像分析使用系统和蔡司Kontron计算机进行。显示条件为:显示距离0.12 m,各种胶片物镜35/70(蔡司),PbO光电阴极显像管,625线(西门子海曼),图像矩阵512 × 512像素,分辨率为7线/mm,投影矩阵面积为5000 microns2。在垂直于分组条形图的一条线上测量灰度范围。最大和最小密度值的差值作为信号。当信号值比多次密度测量均值的标准差高3倍时,测量探测器系统的空间分辨率。结果表明,这两种新型的屏膜组合与传统的屏膜组合相比具有相当大的优势。该结果与纯视觉评估阈值(第一部分)的发现相矛盾,后者没有发现差异。作者的结论是,(自动)交互式图像分析算法可以作为一种客观的衡量标准,在评估图像质量的微小差异时特别有利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信