OBJECTIVE: To assess potential advantages of a new PC-based viewing tool featuring image post-processing for viewing computed radiographs on low-cost hardware (PC) with a common display card and color monitor, and to evaluate the effect of using color versus monochrome monitors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computed radiographs of a statistical phantom were viewed on a PC, with and without post-processing (spatial frequency and contrast processing), employing a monochrome or a color monitor. Findings were compared with the viewing on a radiological Workstation and evaluated with ROC analysis. RESULTS: Image post-processing improved the perception of low-contrast details significantly irrespective of the monitor used. No significant difference in perception was observed between monochrome and color monitors. The review at the radiological Workstation was superior to the review done using the PC with image processing. CONCLUSION: Lower quality hardware (graphic card and monitor) used in low cost PCs negatively affects perception of low-contrast details in computed radiographs. In this situation, it is highly recommended to use spatial frequency and contrast processing. No significant quality gain has been observed for the high-end monochrome monitor compared to the color display. However, the color monitor was affected stronger by high ambient illumination.
OBJECTIVE: To assess potential advantages of a new PC-based viewing tool featuring image post-processing for viewing computed radiographs on low-cost hardware (PC) with a common display card and color monitor, and to evaluate the effect of using color versus monochrome monitors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computed radiographs of a statistical phantom were viewed on a PC, with and without post-processing (spatial frequency and contrast processing), employing a monochrome or a color monitor. Findings were compared with the viewing on a radiological Workstation and evaluated with ROC analysis. RESULTS: Image post-processing improved the perception of low-contrast details significantly irrespective of the monitor used. No significant difference in perception was observed between monochrome and color monitors. The review at the radiological Workstation was superior to the review done using the PC with image processing. CONCLUSION: Lower quality hardware (graphic card and monitor) used in low cost PCs negatively affects perception of low-contrast details in computed radiographs. In this situation, it is highly recommended to use spatial frequency and contrast processing. No significant quality gain has been observed for the high-end monochrome monitor compared to the color display. However, the color monitor was affected stronger by high ambient illumination.