{"title":"[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]。","authors":"G Stamm, G Eichbaum, 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":"{\"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, G Eichbaum, 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}","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
摘要
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。
[Comparison of film-screen combinations with contrast detail diagram and interactive image analysis. 2: Linear assessment of grey scale ranges with interactive image analysis].
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.